So basically this board is just google wars

[Centinel]

....on who can spew the most google links to support their side of the argument?


With of course no regard to the credibility or quality of source.

You know, i can create a blog in a day to support whatever crazy theory I can dream up with and have it hit the front page of google with enough connections.

Just because you found it on google doesnt make it credible......jesus people c'mon...use a little common sense.

 

[Aimster]

Hi, welcome.

If one uses google to find reliable sources such as newspapers then it is acceptable. Each city/county has several+ different newspapers. We are just used to the big ones such as washington post, USAtoday, etc.

people who post sites that favor Jews,Muslims,Athiest, Dems, Republicians are usually not taken seriously.

 

[maddogchen]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Hi, welcome.

If one uses google to find reliable sources such as newspapers then it is acceptable. Each city/county has several+ different newspapers. We are just used to the big ones such as washington post, USAtoday, etc.

people who post sites that favor Jews,Muslims,Athiest, Dems, Republicians are usually not taken seriously.

some who do are also laughed at. Although i think someone used a Russian newspaper and he got laughed at too

 

[Centinel]

newspapers are not credible.....I would venture to say maybe some of the larger ones like the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, BBC, etc. All have their slant of course, but at least there is some semblance of professionalism most of the time.

Educational institutions, think-tanks, official government websites (for statistics and policy), or academic journals would be the best.

You know, like you are required to use for professional papers or papers in college.

 

[maddogchen]

Originally posted by: Centinel
newspapers are not credible.....I would venture to say maybe some of the larger ones like the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, BBC, etc. All have their slant of course, but at least there is some semblance of professionalism most of the time.

Educational institutions, think-tanks, official government websites (for statistics and policy), or academic journals would be the best.

You know, like you are required to use for professional papers or papers in college.

This is Politics and News. Educational institutions, think-tanks, official government websites (for statistics and policy), or academic journals all take too long and are not up to date. People post news and we debate, discuss, attack the credibility of the news.

 

[Aimster]

Would LA COUNTY Weekly be taken seriously? (I just made that newspaper name up)

 

[Centinel]

I'm talking about when people say

"Bush is ruining the economy!!"

or

"Rumsfeld is satan and doesnt like the troops"

or any other claim made by the posters here....I see alot of jaw-wagging, and not a helluva lot of common sense or sources that arent so off their damn rocker it's not funny.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Would LA COUNTY Weekly be taken seriously? (I just made that newspaper name up)

only if it was about something pertaining to LA County

 

[Ozoned]

"So basically this board is just google wars"




You want it to be something else, you need to work for it.

B!tching about it makes it no more or less than what it already is.

 

[Isla]

The only wars I ever see going on here are the ones waged by the people who are threatened by differing opinions and beliefs.

People who are ego-invested in what they believe (for example, I AM a Republican, or I AM a Democrat) rather than simply admitting that they are more comfortable with one socio-cultural paradime than another are more likely to get all riled up and start googling their little hearts out to prove themselves 'right'.

Which is very entertaining some days, and endlessly depressing on others.

So, who were you before you were banned?

 

[Centinel]

Honestly I really am new.

My education background is political science, focusing on foreign and security policy/conflict resolution.

I enjoy having debates with people with differing ideological views than mine, and I saw that this board was very left-leaning (dont take that as an insult people...your views just differ from mine).

I came here hoping to have some good, productive discourse so I can understand other points of view.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Centinel
I'm talking about when people say

"Bush is ruining the economy!!"

or

"Rumsfeld is satan and doesnt like the troops"

or any other claim made by the posters here....I see alot of jaw-wagging, and not a helluva lot of common sense or sources that arent so off their damn rocker it's not funny.

Caveat emptor. Crap link? It's up to you not to buy it. The only sure thing in mud wrestling is the mud. Hope you brought a towel.

 

[Centinel]

Yup...got a big fluffy one from Panama City that I paid way too much for because I forgot to pack my own

 

[Harvey]

Centinel -- I don't understand your point. Google's a great search engine, and, as you say, the credibility of any sited sources is the imparitive.

I don't think much of simply posting links and quotes without any further commentary, but credible sources supporting a point makes a better case than not including them.

Are you suggesting we don't include good sources to support our points? :Q

 

[Centinel]

No, i'm saying that most people here seem to hit google, and post the first bunch of links that come up. Just because it hits the top of google doesnt make it credible.

Anyone can throw up a webpage, or write an editorial from some podunk local newspaper.

google itself is not a credible source...it's a searce engine. Google is irrelevant in my point.....what google brings up is what is relevant.

Have none of you people had to use credible sources for term papers or papers for your profession? Is credibility of source not expected anymore?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Centinel -- I don't understand your point. Google's a great search engine, and, as you say, the credibility of any sited sources is the imparitive.

I don't think much of simply posting links and quotes without any further commentary, but credible sources supporting a point makes a better case than not including them.

Are you suggesting we don't include good sources to support our points? :Q

Centinel's rant is moot, at least in the U.S.

The U.S. lost all credibility claiming there was WMD when none existed.

 

[Centinel]

dmcowen put down the crack pipe.

Seriously dude.....you're starting to scare me.

I mean i've seen some wild reaches before, but BRAVO! you take the cake.


LOL I didnt even mention WMDs

 

[Isla]

Credibility is in the eye of the beholder, Centinel.

Seriously... some people will use the Bible or other religious texts as backing for their arguments. Credible? To them, but not universally.

Here's a little story for you to ponder, since you have stated that you are genuinely interested in understanding other points of view. It's meant to address religious arguments, but it fits nicely for political ones as well.

*******************************

American poet John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887) based the following poem on a fable which was told in India many years ago.

It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind


The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
?God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!?


The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, ?Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me ?tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!?


The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
?I see,? quoth he, ?the Elephant
Is very like a snake!?


The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
?What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain,? quoth he;
? ?Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!?


The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: ?E?en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!?


The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
?I see,? quoth he, ?the Elephant
Is very like a rope!?


And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

Moral:


So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!

 

[Centinel]

Now that was an interesting read Isla. I liked that alot, and makes a good point that politics and religion are based more on perception than fact.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Centinel
dmcowen put down the crack pipe.

Seriously dude.....you're starting to scare me.

I mean i've seen some wild reaches before, but BRAVO! you take the cake.


LOL I didnt even mention WMDs

So you want to replace internet news sources with personal attacks?

 

[Centinel]

I see.....he makes a statement that is totally unrelated to what I was talking about, and that's ok....but I respond and that's not?

Gotcha.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Centinel
dmcowen put down the crack pipe.

Seriously dude.....you're starting to scare me.

I mean i've seen some wild reaches before, but BRAVO! you take the cake.

LOL I didnt even mention WMDs

Clap Clap Clap, that didn't take long.

 

[Harvey]

Centinel -- You're blathering a bunch of meaningless, generalized rant crap. As you said, Google is a search tool. If you want to challenge someone's sources on a point, do it in the particular thread. People do it all the time. Google is just as useful for searching out the roots behind a given site as it is for finding links that match any other word or text string.

Meanwhile, telling dmcowen674 to "put down the crack pipe" doesn't do much for your credibility. It's not relevant in any way. If anything would "start to scare me," it would be lame, disconnected attempted put downs like that. :roll:

 

[Centinel]

Ah, ok....I gotcha now.

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: Centinel
newspapers are not credible.....I would venture to say maybe some of the larger ones like the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, BBC, etc. All have their slant of course, but at least there is some semblance of professionalism most of the time.

Educational institutions, think-tanks, official government websites (for statistics and policy), or academic journals would be the best.

You know, like you are required to use for professional papers or papers in college.

Actually primary sources and source documentation are best.

As far as newspapers are concerned, credibility largely depends upon the context in which the information is utilized. Indeed, the larger papers may appear more credible. However, can you conclusively prove that the quality of information originating from smaller newspapers is any more suspect than that originating from larger newpapers?

You know the AP depends on smaller papers for a sizable portion of its news, especially regional news, right? Consequently, the smaller papers are heavily dependent upon the larger papers for national news.