Factcheck/Snopes bias

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Sure I'll say that USA today is a factual paper. Why would anyone dispute that? This might explain a lot about you... you simply aren't living on the same planet as the rest of us.

Spidey, I don't even know how to argue with you when you're this far divorced from reality. I mean this sincerely, you have a seriously warped view of the world. When google searches on the bias of fact check turn up a lonely blog entry or two by hyper right wing sites, that doesn't mean an organization is biased. (what's funny is that there are other sites claiming factcheck has a conservative bias) The comparison of FOX news is ludicrous and you know it.

What's so strange about you is that everything you are trying to project on other people is an exact description of yourself. I have total contempt for your stupidity (not because you're stupid, but because it's willful), but I'm also feeling sorry for you right now. You're crazy and you don't even know it. I guess that's what makes someone crazy though, thinking that they are normal.

This is where we will just have to hope to agree to disagree. I'm able to realize my own bias and reinforcement of my own beliefs. I also learned long ago that just because you read it on the intarweb doesn't make it true. Your perception of me is the same perception I have of you, so I guess that makes us both crazy.

I will openly admit that factcheck does a really good job of presenting both sides. But that does not make it factual and you should know that. I bring up fox news because they give both sides of the facts, but somehow that makes it a laughable chuckle like I've heard when speaking directly to factcheck authors.

I'll understand your cognitive dissonance if you take to heart that just because you read it on the intarweb doesn't make it true. If you cannot see the bias, nor see and understand it...well I have to resign to disagree. It's not blatant like CNN, USA Today, or the New York Times, but it's there. If you can't see it then you are much farther out of touch with reality than me.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Sure I'll say that USA today is a factual paper. Why would anyone dispute that? This might explain a lot about you... you simply aren't living on the same planet as the rest of us.

Spidey, I don't even know how to argue with you when you're this far divorced from reality. I mean this sincerely, you have a seriously warped view of the world. When google searches on the bias of fact check turn up a lonely blog entry or two by hyper right wing sites, that doesn't mean an organization is biased. (what's funny is that there are other sites claiming factcheck has a conservative bias) The comparison of FOX news is ludicrous and you know it.

What's so strange about you is that everything you are trying to project on other people is an exact description of yourself. I have total contempt for your stupidity (not because you're stupid, but because it's willful), but I'm also feeling sorry for you right now. You're crazy and you don't even know it. I guess that's what makes someone crazy though, thinking that they are normal.

This is where we will just have to hope to agree to disagree. I'm able to realize my own bias and reinforcement of my own beliefs. I also learned long ago that just because you read it on the intarweb doesn't make it true. Your perception of me is the same perception I have of you, so I guess that makes us both crazy.

I will openly admit that factcheck does a really good job of presenting both sides. But that does not make it factual and you should know that. I bring up fox news because they give both sides of the facts, but somehow that makes it a laughable chuckle like I've heard when speaking directly to factcheck authors.

I'll understand your cognitive dissonance if you take to heart that just because you read it on the intarweb doesn't make it true. If you cannot see the bias, nor see and understand it...well I have to resign to disagree. It's not blatant like CNN, USA Today, or the New York Times, but it's there. If you can't see it then you are much farther out of touch with reality than me.

No one ever said something was true because it was on the internet. You determine something's veracity by supporting citations from multiple sources. You know, the way normal people do it. The idea that you're trying to argue that facts have 'two sides' is deeply disturbing to me. You aren't entitled to your own reality, sorry.

We won't agree to disagree because as I said earlier that would imply that both of our positions had equal merit. You are arguing something so twisted that you are literally embodying what Stephen Colbert does as a PARODY. Doesn't that make you feel strange that someone is making millions on TV by acting similarly to what you just said, but the reason he makes so much money is that everyone thinks it is so absurd it's hilarious?

 

[spidey07]

LOL, eskimospy you are a product of the daily show and stephen colbert.

These are your sources, don't you understand how biased this makes you? Fucking liberals. Rush, Hannity and The Great One crush that bunch of kooks with things called fact.

Perfect example of cognitive dissonance. You're way to gone mentally to even understand you are that far gone in your perception of reality.

 

[Double Trouble]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
We won't agree to disagree because as I said earlier that would imply that both of our positions had equal merit.

Get over yourself, who's to judge that your position has more merit than his? You, in your infinite wisdom? Overinflated ego FTL. Just face it, you're full of crap.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Rush, Hannity and The Great One crush that bunch of kooks with things called fact.

Perfect example of cognitive dissonance.

Edited down to truth.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: spidey07
Rush, Hannity and The Great One crush that bunch of kooks with things called fact.

Perfect example of cognitive dissonance.

Edited down to truth.

Hey, I'm aware of my own and openly admitted it. I also used hyperbole in what you quoted.

Is eskimpospy aware of his?

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: spidey07
Rush, Hannity and The Great One crush that bunch of kooks with things called fact.

Perfect example of cognitive dissonance.

Edited down to truth.

Hey, I'm aware of my own. I also used hyperbole in what you quoted.
Is eskimpospy aware of his?

He beholds the mote in his brother's eye...

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Double Trouble

Originally posted by: eskimospy
We won't agree to disagree because as I said earlier that would imply that both of our positions had equal merit.

Get over yourself, who's to judge that your position has more merit than his? You, in your infinite wisdom? Overinflated ego FTL. Just face it, you're full of crap.

Ahhhh. The old tired idea that all opinions are of equal value. Guess what? They aren't. My position, that factcheck.org is a nonpartisan outfit that is largely free of bias is supported by most impartial observers on both the left and the right. Spidey's counterpoint is that everyone is biased, and as FOX news is to the right, factcheck.org is to the left. I am unable to find any credible source that provides a similar viewpoint.

See, when someone can back up what they are saying, it makes their argument stronger than someone who just spouts stupid shit all day. This isn't 4th grade, everyone isn't equally special.

As for Spidey personally, you seem to be unable to read correctly. I never said Stephen Colbert was my source, I mentioned that he plays a character that is intended to be funny on TV and that character is intentionally made to act stupid and ignorant. You have stated opinions that are nearly identical to this made up satirical character's opinions, but you have done so without irony.

By the way, it's awesome you've just brought in Sean Hannity and company and how 'factual' they are into this.

Please keep posting Spidey, I'm enjoying watching you self destruct.

 

[sandorski]

Facts have a Liberal Bias. Those who use them are Communist Agents charged with spiking the local Water supply in an attempt to corrupt the precious bodily fluids of America!

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Double Trouble

Originally posted by: eskimospy
We won't agree to disagree because as I said earlier that would imply that both of our positions had equal merit.

Get over yourself, who's to judge that your position has more merit than his? You, in your infinite wisdom? Overinflated ego FTL. Just face it, you're full of crap.

Ahhhh. The old tired idea that all opinions are of equal value. Guess what? They aren't.

<snip>

Who decides what opinions are of most value? Who's the ultimate judge of that, you of course? :roll: DT's absolutely right, get over yourself, you're full of it.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: sportage
·Palin recently said
·Palin has actively s
·Palin wants to teac
·Palin doesn't believe

Seriously, you couldn't post this in one of the 100 Palin threads?

I have no response to Spidey since he's on Jonk's List, but I see Eskimo gave it a shot. I stopped bothering, it keeps my blood pressure down.

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
It might help if people didn't post things from there as if it's unassailable though. Maybe we'd get those 3 days if there were 3 days without you people posting it as if it were gospel.

Feel free to dispute any of their assertions with equally well researched links whenever you please. If you can prove something they write wrong with credible sources I will be the first to take your side.

Seriously, he wants people to stop posting links/info from the most informative political site on the web because he doesn't like the subjects of the articles? Did you know about half the articles on the site debunk Obama and other Democratic ads/statements? Feel free to post them here to support your arguments against Obama. I have never seen anyone, be it blogger or P&N poster, dispute Factcheck's corrections of Democratic misstatements. Sure the Ron Paul supporters took exception to the one article dedicated to debunking all of RP's wacko claims, but if you want to ally yourself with conspiracy theorists, have at it.

And one last time. No one said the articles are "unassailable." If you find anything, that shows the FC article is exaggerating, misstating, or spinning, or showing any kind of bias, then post it! The whole point of this thread, as stated (and then ignored by everyone) in the OP was that bald assertions of bias against FC and other similar demonstrably independent sites are not helpful or useful, and merely make the one speaking look like they are whining about the facts presented.

Ah, so not only do you people have a hard time reading what I say, you then just try to make shit up and claim it's what I said.

Again, stop with the BS about it "the most" or whatever you want to claim about it. It's a fine site if you want to get closer to the truth but it falls short of being "the truth" as it allows editorializing and opinion. If you nuts can't see how that can present a problem, then there is no chance at having rational conversation with you.

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Again, stop with the BS about it "the most" or whatever you want to claim about it. It's a fine site if you want to get closer to the truth but it falls short of being "the truth" as it allows editorializing and opinion. If you nuts can't see how that can present a problem, then there is no chance at having rational conversation with you.

It's not "the truth" unless it says what they think it should say, and anyone who has another opinion (according to eskimospy) must have an opinion with no merit since he is the ultimate arbiter of what is correct and what opinion is correct

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Again, stop with the BS about it "the most" or whatever you want to claim about it. It's a fine site if you want to get closer to the truth but it falls short of being "the truth" as it allows editorializing and opinion. If you nuts can't see how that can present a problem, then there is no chance at having rational conversation with you.

It's not "the truth" unless it says what they think it should say, and anyone who has another opinion (according to eskimospy) must have an opinion with no merit since he is the ultimate arbiter of what is correct and what opinion is correct

Yeah, the idea that people should have to back up their opinions to be taken seriously is just crrraaaaaaaazzy. The "it's my opinion so it can't be wrong" argument should have died somewhere in middle school.

 

[Taejin]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Thank you for so perfectly encapsulating this stupidity. This should give us a respite of at least 3 days until some other idiot shows up with the "HURF BLURF FACTZCHEK IZ BIAS"

It might help if people didn't post things from there as if it's unassailable though. Maybe we'd get those 3 days if there were 3 days without you people posting it as if it were gospel.

Feel free to dispute any of their assertions with equally well researched links whenever you please. If you can prove something they write wrong with credible sources I will be the first to take your side.

The cognitive dissonance is very, very strong with you.

Look, if you can't see it then I can't explain it to you. Just like how fox news is fair and balanced to me (and it is, through my minds eye), factcheck is truth to you. Step outside your own bias to see that it is there. The blog link was a perfect example of their bias, sure it's a blog, but I question blogs just as much as I question and trust factcheck - run, founded by and contributors of professors and journalists who statistically by a wide margin are liberal. And if you ever heard them speak (staff of the site) you would see it. But you can't, because it reinforces your belief.

Next you'll be saying that USA today is a factual paper like the new york times?

lol this guy is seriously trying to say that all truth and lies are relative..

go kill yourself

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Again, stop with the BS about it "the most" or whatever you want to claim about it. It's a fine site if you want to get closer to the truth but it falls short of being "the truth" as it allows editorializing and opinion. If you nuts can't see how that can present a problem, then there is no chance at having rational conversation with you.

It's not "the truth" unless it says what they think it should say, and anyone who has another opinion (according to eskimospy) must have an opinion with no merit since he is the ultimate arbiter of what is correct and what opinion is correct

Yeah, the idea that people should have to back up their opinions to be taken seriously is just crrraaaaaaaazzy. The "it's my opinion so it can't be wrong" argument should have died somewhere in middle school.

Yeah, by "back up" opinion you mean "please show me how I'm correct, otherwise I'll just post some drivel as to why you must be wrong and your opinion is without merit". Puhlease. Your blinders are so bad that you simply can't realize that you are biased in your own perspective just like I'm biased in mine.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Double Trouble

Originally posted by: eskimospy
We won't agree to disagree because as I said earlier that would imply that both of our positions had equal merit.

Get over yourself, who's to judge that your position has more merit than his? You, in your infinite wisdom? Overinflated ego FTL. Just face it, you're full of crap.

I see. So when the government issues a report based on study, science, and observation that WTC7 collapsed due to fire, it is equal in merit to any person, even a 12 year old, who watches the collapse on TV and merely asserts that "no, it was demolition explosives that did it."

Remember, the government report is merely the Government's determination and assessment, it is not and cannot be 100% fact. It is their informed, educated opinion. Just as the 12 year old or laymen watching the tv is asserting their relatively uninformed opinion.

Do you concede that some positions have more merit than others?

 

[Double Trouble]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Double Trouble

Originally posted by: eskimospy
We won't agree to disagree because as I said earlier that would imply that both of our positions had equal merit.

Get over yourself, who's to judge that your position has more merit than his? You, in your infinite wisdom? Overinflated ego FTL. Just face it, you're full of crap.

I see. So when the government issues a report based on study, science, and observation that WTC7 collapsed due to fire, it is equal in merit to any person, even a 12 year old, who watches the collapse on TV and merely asserts that "no, it was demolition explosives that did it."

Remember, the government report is merely the Government's determination and assessment, it is not and cannot be 100% fact. It is their informed, educated opinion. Just as the 12 year old or laymen watching the tv is asserting their relatively uninformed opinion.

Do you concede that some positions have more merit than others?

Of course some positions have more merit than others, that's not the point. spidey07 and eskimospy each posted their positions. They disagree on the position. spidey does what every normal rational person would do -- agree to disagree since neither side is going to convince the other side and further attempts at doing so are pointless. Readers of the thread can view the points and make their own decision as to which position has merit. Only someone with intellectual insecurity or an overinflated ego problem (or both) would feel the need to refuse to "agree to disagree", and unilaterally determine which position has merit, as if someone appointed them sole arbiter of such matters. I'm pretty sure we can each determine what position has merit from our perspective.