Funny Events of the "Woke" world

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,574
2,208
118
The IEA is a neoliberal, capitalist think tank that does nothing but pump out a vast amount of neoliberal capitalist propaganda on behalf of multinational corporations and rich, right-wing donors. Whilst I wouldn't necessarily say everything it produces is utter junk, the IEA is a completely biased organisation that is paid (very handsomely) to manipulate policy, not provide truth. It has then paid three right-wingers with very extensive links to right wing organisations and policy formulation to produce a document saying exactly what its donors pay it to produce, like every study they produce only ever comes out with the answers that happen to be just what their corporate, billionaire donors want people to read.

I find it fascinating you're hot on this, as it also states mask mandates reduced mortality 18.7%, the single most effective government-imposed measure it assesses.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,016
665
118
"Consumer feedback is bad if they listen to people I don't like".

God, imagine thinking adding ramps in dungeons because a piece of fanart got popular and changing a couple races so they weren't genetically evil *20 fucking years after Warcraft did* has any material effect on the world
Just what your doing now. Literally saying the counter feedback is bad because you don't like it.

YOUR MOVE.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,016
665
118
Welcome to woke world where the woke are now pro pulling songs from channels for "racism" and being "Pro Lynching"


The song in question


The song never mentions race at all. It's literally just in the heads of people calling it racist thinking it's about black people or must be about them despite the song never talking about race at all lol
 

Absent

And twice is the only way to live.
Jan 25, 2023
1,594
1,557
118
Country
Switzerland
Gender
The boring one
Welcome to woke world where the woke are now pro pulling songs from channels for "racism" and being "Pro Lynching"


The song in question


The song never mentions race at all. It's literally just in the heads of people calling it racist thinking it's about black people or must be about them despite the song never talking about race at all lol
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
12,132
6,399
118
Country
United Kingdom
Depends on the modeling, you should take most modeling with a generous sprinkling of salt.
Obviously-- and scientists do. They're usually quite upfront about limitations and unknown factors. Whereas you tend to look at minor issues with modelling, dismiss it in its entirety, and then insist that the science was wrong.

Mainstream media pushed "western" scientific consensus is not the worldwide scientific consensus.
You have no idea how to recognise a scientific consensus, considering that your approach is to proactively search out a small number of Internet personality researchers saying what you want to hear, and then endlessly post ttheir videos.

Funny how none of you in the 3-ish years now can link to a paper showing proof of masks working or a cost-benefit analysis saying lockdowns did anything;
Jesus Christ, this again. Nobody bought it the first 200 times you said this, and nobody is buying it now.
 
Last edited:

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,574
2,208
118
I'm well aware that it's probability to a degree, the issue I have when the confidence range is huge. Like I said, there's a range of 30 million to 60 million buffalo America had pre-colonalization, that's quite a range and that's only 500 years ago. There's a chance the population was not even in that range. Whereas if you say you're 95% confident there was 45-50 million buffalo, that probability is a lot better and much more accurate as well. If we have such a range for buffalo 500 years ago, you think we're gonna have better confidences and more accurate ranges for other animal populations before humans? Also, you say that the UK was mainly forest before humans, which means there were probably large numbers of deer then and deer on a pound-per-pound basis emit more methane than cows. I'm more than willing to say we should probably lower cow numbers but people have to be extreme and saying beef and diary have to go.
That is all just a big, fat, empty pile of waffle.

Scientists have been estimating biomass and animal populations across history for decades, across dozens, hundreds of papers. Sure, they're estimates. But there's a shit-ton of work and thinking that's gone into it from thousands of professionals. All your bluster doesn't change the fact that you're some random guy with no understanding of this science making up numbers of your own and demanding equal credibility. You're not getting it.

It varies for me based on the thing being studied and how much evidence I'm going to require.
You're just trying to rationalise the fact you pick and choose what you want to believe with the science being largely irrelevant. You might not have realised this yet, but everyone else in this forum has.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawki

thebobmaster

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
2,583
2,487
118
Country
United States

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,480
7,055
118
Country
United States
God I miss when country had cops as the antagonists. If you aren't a very specific slice of US demographics, rural cops are not your friend, but Mr Private School Suburban Cowboy up there couldn't know that. Fucker grew up in a city bigger than any city Montana even has and tries to be authentic to small town life? Get real.

Say it's not racist all you want, but trawl through the comments on social media defending it and you can see the message got through loud and clear. Bog standard "get uppity around *us* and we'll shoot you, stay in your burned down cities"
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,176
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/07/19/is-evolutionary-biology-racist/

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023...-matt-johnson-discuss-the-legacy-of-hitchens/

https://quillette.com/2023/07/20/the-lefts-social-contract-is-broken-heres-how-to-fix-it/

Say it's not racist all you want, but trawl through the comments on social media defending it and you can see the message got through loud and clear. Bog standard "get uppity around *us* and we'll shoot you, stay in your burned down cities"
Um, who are the ones who burnt cities down? Not police, I can tell you that much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dwarvenhobble

Avnger

Trash Goblin
Legacy
Apr 1, 2016
2,122
1,251
118
Country
United States
Um, who are the ones who burnt cities down? Not police, I can tell you that much.
Literally no one burnt down cities. Chicago, Minneapolis, Portland, Los Angeles, etc are all still standing with exactly the same skylines (give or take a new construction or two) as a decade ago.

Did you actually believe cities were burnt down? How uncritically have you been consuming propaganda? Not even the most destructive US riots of all time managed to burn down a city...

 
Last edited:

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,176
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Literally no one burnt down cities. Chicago, Minneapolis, Portland, San Diego, etc are all still standing with exactly the same skylines (give or take a new construction or two) as a decade ago.

Did you actually believe cities were burnt down? How uncritically have you been consuming propaganda? Not even the LA Race Riots of the 90s managed to burn down a city...
Yes, thank you, genius, cities aren't literally burnt down. What a revelation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dwarvenhobble

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,176
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Then why did you claim that cities were burnt down?
Technically, it was MysteriousGX who claimed that cities were burnt down.

Secondly, you're engaging in semantics. If I say a company was decimated, I don't literally mean that 10% of its number was eradicated. If I say "Paris is burning" because of the riots there, I'm not literally saying that the entire city is on fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dwarvenhobble

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,480
7,055
118
Country
United States
The vast, vast majority of protests were entirely peaceful, and the ones that weren't tended to be peaceful until cops showed up in riot armor and started attacking protestors and journalists

Then this dink comes out with a music video saying that cops do know wrong and we'll kill you if you protest otherwise
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
9,656
831
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
The IEA is a neoliberal, capitalist think tank that does nothing but pump out a vast amount of neoliberal capitalist propaganda on behalf of multinational corporations and rich, right-wing donors. Whilst I wouldn't necessarily say everything it produces is utter junk, the IEA is a completely biased organisation that is paid (very handsomely) to manipulate policy, not provide truth. It has then paid three right-wingers with very extensive links to right wing organisations and policy formulation to produce a document saying exactly what its donors pay it to produce, like every study they produce only ever comes out with the answers that happen to be just what their corporate, billionaire donors want people to read.

I find it fascinating you're hot on this, as it also states mask mandates reduced mortality 18.7%, the single most effective government-imposed measure it assesses.
So just ad-hominem attacks vs actually explaining or countering how the paper is wrong... par for the course.

I guess John Hopkins is also a right-wing think tank too?

Where's a single paper saying lockdown benefits outweighed costs? Still waiting on that to appear. Lockdowns in the US are even more costly because tons of people were fired, thus losing their health insurance (not a consideration for most western countries) and avoiding going to the hospital until they really really had to whether it was covid or anything else that is possibly fatal.

Obviously-- and scientists do. They're usually quite upfront about limitations and unknown factors. Whereas you tend to look at minor issues with modelling, dismiss it in its entirety, and then insist that the science was wrong.



You have no idea how to recognise a scientific consensus, considering that your approach is to proactively search out a small number of Internet personality researchers saying what you want to hear, and then endlessly post ttheir videos.



Jesus Christ, this again. Nobody bought it the first 200 times you said this, and nobody is buying it now.
Then why did most countries not do what the US did? Why did Sweden do the best in all of Europe with no basically no covid restrictions, no mask mandates. Just look at the very start of this video, not a mask to be seen in public during rush hour in Sweden.

You have no idea what scientific consensus is. Scientific consensus on masks and lockdowns before covid was that they didn't work and there's been no evidence showing they have worked so how'd scientific consensus change on those things without any evidence?

Provide the proof and I'll shut-up about it. Nobody has provided the proof because it doesn't exist. Single good study on ivermectin was done and I shut-up about it. You win science debates with evidence.

That is all just a big, fat, empty pile of waffle.

Scientists have been estimating biomass and animal populations across history for decades, across dozens, hundreds of papers. Sure, they're estimates. But there's a shit-ton of work and thinking that's gone into it from thousands of professionals. All your bluster doesn't change the fact that you're some random guy with no understanding of this science making up numbers of your own and demanding equal credibility. You're not getting it.



You're just trying to rationalise the fact you pick and choose what you want to believe with the science being largely irrelevant. You might not have realised this yet, but everyone else in this forum has.
Biomass isn't a great indicator of methane emissions from said animals.

You're the one picking and choosing. We have literally no evidence masks work but you still say they do work. I couldn't even get you to admit wearing masks outside is pointless, you wouldn't even budge on that. Remember when models said just merely having people wear masks would stop the pandemic in its tracks?

Literally no one burnt down cities. Chicago, Minneapolis, Portland, Los Angeles, etc are all still standing with exactly the same skylines (give or take a new construction or two) as a decade ago.

Did you actually believe cities were burnt down? How uncritically have you been consuming propaganda? Not even the most destructive US riots of all time managed to burn down a city...

The vast, vast majority of protests were entirely peaceful, and the ones that weren't tended to be peaceful until cops showed up in riot armor and started attacking protestors and journalists

Then this dink comes out with a music video saying that cops do know wrong and we'll kill you if you protest otherwise
You guys are pro BLM protests because they were protesting for a thing that you are for vs if the same exact violence/damage happened for a conservative protest, you'd be saying it was disgusting or whatever. I recall a news segment of the reporter live at BLM protest saying the protest was peaceful and you could literally see a city building on fire in the shot.
 

Avnger

Trash Goblin
Legacy
Apr 1, 2016
2,122
1,251
118
Country
United States
You guys are pro BLM protests because they were protesting for a thing that you are for vs if the same exact violence/damage happened for a conservative protest, you'd be saying it was disgusting or whatever. I recall a news segment of the reporter live at BLM protest saying the protest was peaceful and you could literally see a city building on fire in the shot.
Yes, your disregard for facts when they got in the way of your preferred narrative is already well-known. No need to keep showcasing it. At this point, I think the difference between anecdotes and statistics has been explained to you in the tens of times, so I'm not going to try to do it myself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheMysteriousGX

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,480
7,055
118
Country
United States
You guys are pro BLM protests because they were protesting for a thing that you are for vs if the same exact violence/damage happened for a conservative protest, you'd be saying it was disgusting or whatever. I recall a news segment of the reporter live at BLM protest saying the protest was peaceful and you could literally see a city building on fire in the shot.
Yes, I think massive protests around grotesque police brutality are warranted, and that if the cops respond to those protests by attacking journalists, kettling protesters, and shooting people in the face with "rubber" bullets, causing several people to lose eyes, I don't really care if people start fighting back

I wouldn't be okay with conservatives doing the same to make 10 year olds carry their rapist's babies to term or eliminating gay people from public life or whatever the fuck a "conservative protest" would be about.

I realize that "good things are good and bad things are bad" is what you define postmodernism to be, but it's the reality of the situation
 

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,574
2,208
118
So just ad-hominem attacks vs actually explaining or countering how the paper is wrong... par for the course.
Let's imagine a scenario. The police are interviewing a suspect accused of a crime. The suspect tells the interviewing detective "I didn't do it". The detective replies "Sure, but you would say that, wouldn't you?" The detective has made an ad hominem... but the detective is right to do so. The suspect's assertion of innocence has to be evaluated in the context of the benefit to the suspect of being found innocent, thereby meaning he is motivated to lie and his statement is unreliable.

This is the context in which I have delivered an ad hominem: a completely justifiable querying of the authors and publishers because they are biased, and at worst even have an outright conflict of interest. This is an absolutely basic principle of assessing the quality of material. It's on this basis I'm not motivated to engage with it. It's a basic concept of science: full disclosure and transparency, acknowledgement of sources, etc.

I guess John Hopkins is also a right-wing think tank too?
Oh my god. This isn't even the first time you've made this absurd error. Why won't you read and learn?

John Hopkins is an institution which employs academics who are free to do their own research through external funding grants. This paper is not the official view of John Hopkins, as per the standard boilerplate up front and centre:
"The Studies in Applied Economics series is under the general direction of Prof. Steve H. Hanke, Founder and Co-Director of The Johns Hopkins Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise ([email protected]). The views expressed in each working paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the institutions that the authors are affiliated with."

We can look through the output of John Hopkins and see the wild and wonderful variety of the output of it's staff reflecting a multitude of views. We won't find that from the IEA, because the IEA does not support or promote free investigation of the world.

Where's a single paper saying lockdown benefits outweighed costs?
Because the whole exercise is difficult to the point of impossible and fundamentally a load of shit that distracts from the issues more than it helps. Which is something people from all over the political spectrum can agree on.

The function of this line is for the usual anti-lockdown suspects to make bogus claims. They can't actually achieve useful answers either way, the aim is merely to influence the peanut gallery into agreeing with them. They have simply made a claim they cannot adequately defend, and then try to demand we have to believe it until it is disproven. Fuck that shit.

Why did Sweden do the best in all of Europe
Fuck! Why are you repeating this, again, when it is flatly wrong? The below graph is 2021 data, but indicates just how far Sweden was from the best. Why do you just baldly state such completely and easily disprovable lies?
1689865646303.png

You're the one picking and choosing. We have literally no evidence masks work but you still say they do work.
Au contraire! We literally have evidence that masks work. We also literally have evidence that does not find that they work. The reason most scientists think they do and the cranks you get your information from think they don't is simply that your cranks ignore a load of the evidence.
 

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,574
2,208
118
Biomass isn't a great indicator of methane emissions from said animals.
This is a sort of random, squeaking fart of an objection. Partly because it's not making any meaningful point that moves your case an inch further, and partly because it suggests you simply did not read the sources provided.

That appears to be your commitment to rational, scientific discourse writ large: "Yeah, that stuff's complex and doesn't say what I want to believe, so I'll just not read it". You are exactly the sort of person who simply posts a supposed paper and demands everyone takes note of it, with not even the most cursory evaluation of how reliable it is likely to be never mind the contents in detail. One can only laugh at the irony of you demanding we analyse 200-page reports when you showed no sense of responsibility to check or understand it before you posted it in the first place. It is even disgusting and disrespectful for you to lazily and ignorantly throw shit around that's far beyond your comprehension, but at the same time expect everyone else to put in hours of work to refute it.