Data does not lie. Republicans deliver and believe more BS than the Democrats

The partisans on this site are no different than our politicians and the media.

 

Prove it

 

This sounds like asking what is a pen and the reply is, "a pen is a pen shaped object". When you fail to define your term, you can ignore what is in your face that you don't want to concede: the totalitarianism comes from a bigger government, which is what the left, not the right, wants.
Again, it wasn't the right that colluded with, for instance, Facebook, to suppress the Hunter Biden Laptop story. It is the Left, not the right, wailing that Twitter will allow opposing opinions stating things like Covid appears to have come from a lab, etc.

 

Yeah, we can tell by all your nuh-uh rebuttals throughout the thread.

Nobody need prove their opinions to you or anyone else.
Opinions and beliefs are facts that are unproved. Facts are provable. Learn the difference, please.

 

I agree, putting faith in a study that does not supply information concerning the questions and the responses given is rather worrisome and should be questioned. I also question, did the study confirm that all of the participants were being truthful concerning their political affiliations?
I question, how the study confirmed the participants were being truthful or not truthful. I think that would be a very important component concerning the results of the study being accurate and useful information for the reader.

 

The persons that identify as men in adulthood were assigned female (not male) at birth because they had female body parts.

That is why they can become pregnant and give birth to children of their own after they identify as men via the use of those female body parts.

A baby boy that has male body parts can not give birth to his own children when he grows up to be a man. His body parts can only impregnate a woman. Not become pregnant and give birth to children.

I have no problem with cisgender identifying as men. The ‘idea’ that it is possible for men to become pregnant and give birth sounds problematic.

 

The article contains little or no data and even fewer facts. Given the overall quality of sociological studies these days I find this sadly unsurprising.

 

Trump specifically said that he condemned those elements. So why are you willfully going around spreading Miss and disinformation?

And as for the "men getting pregnant". . . That is just absolute clown world level stupidity.

 

Fake news. Way too many Dems bought "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" and believe the bald-faced lie to this day.

The Data is clear. BS delivered by and believed by, too many Dem's.

ELON MUSK WAS RIGHT ABOUT “HANDS UP, DON’T SHOOT” BLM NARRATIVE: “The Whole Thing Was A Fiction.”

'Musk tweeted the link to the DOJ report.'

'Various lefty outlets tried to whatabout the DOJ report' on the shooting that falsified the lying fake news BLM narrative run in the service of the DNC.

'Brown was unarmed. Including when just prior to the shooting he strong-armed a local convenience store.'

'Brown also was unarmed when he sucker-punched officer Darren Wilson in the face as Wilson sat in a patrol car, and tried to steal Wilson’s gun. That was the first time Brown was shot, and then he was shot fatally when he made a second charge at Wilson.'

'Wilson was exonerated and never charged by the local prosecutors or the Eric 'The With' Holder – Barack Obama Justice Department.'

'Not everybody can handle the truth, though': St. Louis mayor Tishaura Jones quits Twitter over Elon Musk’s Ferguson tweet.

Don't let the door hit you.

 

This is absolutely ridiculously laughable coming from the party who tells us that men can get "pregnant" and that gender is a "spectrum"....

 

~ Are you saying the Democrats deliver and believe more BS .. . ?

 

Not only that but then they try to project it on to others.

They've been doing it ever since they attempted to have us all believed that Democrat slave owners all suddenly became Republican.

A brilliant political strategy to cover up your own historical sins..... Not only do you have to not apologize but you take your sins and paste them on to your political opposites.

They have many decades of practice projecting their shortcomings on to others.

 

The strawman you are trying to reach for is sub par, to simplify, not up to the task. You are flailing all over the place running for the OP topic trying to get a foot hold that is nonexistent. The RW are the conspiracy crazies who are highly susceptible to B/S and demigods. History trashes your flailing deflections into the dust. To simplify even more, read my sig.

 

There are 3 types of lies. There are lies, damned lies, and there are statistics.

One can, with enough word spinning, make any statistic say whatever it is that you want it to.

Your article admits it based whether something was true or false on factcheckers used by Facebook and Twitter. Facebook, in a court said that those factchecks were just "opinion". And we all know how well then Twitters factcheckers "fact checked" the NY Posts reporting of Hunters laptop story.

When you use biased sources, you're going to get biased results.

 

In life, everything is possible and if you look hard enough, you will always find an example of anything your mind can think of.

Nonetheless, humanity has to have a norm, has to have a guideline that differentiates between good and bad. If that norm is followed, more often than not things will come out right. What your post seems to suggest is that we need to doubt everything and not have any guidelines.

That kind of thinking brings chaos and anarchy.

 

Let me give your post the same answer I just gave someone else that stated much of the same as you are stating:

"In life, everything is possible and if you look hard enough, you will always find an example of anything your mind can think of.

Nonetheless, humanity has to have a norm, has to have a guideline that differentiates between good and bad. If that norm is followed, more often than not things will come out right. What your post seems to suggest is that we need to doubt everything and not have any guidelines.

That kind of thinking brings chaos and anarchy."

If things are not based on the data, the facts, and the truths most applicable to the issue, anyone can do anything they want and never be responsible for their actions.

 

Words are cheap and especially when they come from Trump. We all know that Trump does not actually condemn White Supremacists.

and here is proof of that. This happened two days ago:

Trump’s Latest Dinner Guest: Nick Fuentes, White Supremacist

 

Doubt everything? Only if you think in extremes. But doubting the government? Doubting "experts". Yeah...that is part of what America is based on. And we have survived for 246 years. For instance, the "there are three lies" quote...can be traced back to the late 1800's. Though there is some confusion as to who actually said it and where it was referenced from/who. You can find examples of them from earlier times, even if not those exact words.

If you want a "standard" don't go by statistics. Go by what is Good and Right. Even if you only follow your own form of what is "good and right", and people disagree on what that is, we'll still have a better standard than to use statistics predicated on human sociology.

 

Which is pretty much the sum of the lefts propaganda policy, denial that you are doing what you are doing and blame it on the opposition.

"Data" lies all the time. Any jackass can write anything on a piece of paper. Having no brain or power to resist, the paper will allow itself to become a document alleging what ever asinine minds want to claim.
In other words, your (unidentified but obviously left-conceived) document would be another left-wing load of crap. The liberals only truth is that they think everything they think is not only sane and rational, but correct because they thought it. Never have we seen a group of people so self-deceived and distant from truth in America. You argue against the reflection of your own position.

 

First of all, life is like marriage............for good and bad. When you get married, you know there will be both good and bad but hope it is more of the former than the latter.

One additional fact of life is that all extremes are bad. What we have seen among the Republicans (and some Democrats as well) are extremes. The extreme right has been in charge of the Republican party for the past 30 years and even more so when Trump came up.

We do need to have a guideline. A standard that is followed and from where good and bad can be measured and judged.

Yes, government brings negatives, yes, statistics can be misleading, yes, human sociology can have errors. Nonetheless, looking at the positives has to be compared to the negatives and judged as which is better and which is worse.

I happen to believe (and have seen it for all the years that our nation has been around) that the positives of what we have outweigh the negatives of what is being offered by the Republicans.

 

You confuse proof with opinion. You can do better.

 

Fake News. My post suggests no such thing. You title makes an absurd assertion and now it stands refuted, the refuse it always was, chest-thumping tribalism.

When will some on the Left take responsibility for the pack of lies they foisted on the nation with all these waves of false deliberately divisive slanderous propaganda? Speaking of looking reality in the face and responding appropriately: Trump deems Kanye West a ‘seriously troubled man’ who ‘just happens to be Black’ after Mar-a-Lago trip fallout. Some of the Left would benefit from measuring their claims against reality rather than their narrative. This clearly was not the conclusion Trump wanted to reach, but wisely, he bowed to the obvious reality.

The Right always doubted that Trump was an agent of Putin, much of the Left bought it and peddled it.
The Right doubted the claim of no person to person transfer of COVID, much of the Left bought it and peddled it.
The Right doubted the natural origins of COVID, much of the Left bought it and peddled it.
The Right immediately considered that COVID was intelligently engineered in the nearby China bio labs, much of the Left declared that misinformation and peddled that misinformation as fact.
The Right early on pointed out that if COVID could be recaught by the vaccinated and previously infected that "herd immunity' was a pipe dream, much of the Left declared that misinformation and peddled their false claim as fact.

You invited this factual rebuke with your claim in the title.

 

It is so easy to put words on paper and say what you believe but none of the stuff you posted above has been proven to have occurred as you think it did.

When you say peddled, declared misinformation and false claim all of those are opinion. Data and facts state otherwise. When you can prove your words, come back.

 

Anyone who trusts data during a well documented replication crisis will inevitably be disinformed.

“Much ink has been spilled over the “replication crisis” in the last decade and a half, including here at Vox.
***Researchers have discovered, over and over, that lots of findings in fields like psychology, sociology, medicine, and economics don’t hold up when other researchers try to replicate them.***

This conversation was fueled in part by John Ioannidis’s 2005 article “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False” and by the controversy around a 2011 paper that used then-standard statistical methods to find that people have precognition. But since then, many researchers have explored the replication crisis from different angles. ***Why are research findings so often unreliable?*** Is the problem just that we test for “statistical significance” — the likelihood that similarly strong results could have occurred by chance — in a nuance-free way? Is it that null results (that is, when a study finds no detectable effects) are ignored while positive ones make it into journals?

A recent write-up by Alvaro de Menard, a participant in the Defense Advanced Research Project’s Agency’s (DARPA) replication markets project (more on this below), makes the case for a more depressing view: ***The processes that lead to unreliable research findings are routine, well understood, predictable, and in principle pretty easy to avoid.*** And yet, he argues, we’re still not improving the quality and rigor of social science research.”
VOX, “replication crisis” for a decade. Have we learned anything?, By Kelsey Piper Oct 14, 2020. (***mine)
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/21504366/science-replication-crisis-peer-review-statistics

 

LOL. I wonder what your pronouns are. Kidding, not really. But don't relax just yet, a new ice age is coming, I mean the OZone hole, I mean global warming that will submerge entire nations by 2000, I mean climate change! I mean the Climate Crisis! The SKY IS FALLING!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now wear go wear a mask and attend your next funeral online.