Fake News

[JohnDonne]

I represented your idea so damn accurately that you just repeated the conclusion I inferred from it.

Your idea isn’t new, most rational people are aware words handed down from other humans is not the word of God.

There is something called justified belief that we round up to facts and truth, and it’s been working quite well to get us to the moon, understand the cycles of history and know what’s happening in our world.

That it’s not perfect is both obvious and acceptable because it brings us nearer to the truth.

No. You obviously lied again, which is ironic considering what you are defending. weren't you just disputing the idea that leftists are inherently dishonest?

I'm not lying, you're just not following the point, which I'm okay with, sometimes winning happens without the other person's knowledge.

[Speaker to Animals]

I represented your idea so damn accurately that you just repeated the conclusion I inferred from it.

Your idea isn’t new, most rational people are aware words handed down from other humans is not the word of God.

There is something called justified belief that we round up to facts and truth, and it’s been working quite well to get us to the moon, understand the cycles of history and know what’s happening in our world.

That it’s not perfect is both obvious and acceptable because it brings us nearer to the truth.

No. You obviously lied again, which is ironic considering what you are defending. weren't you just disputing the idea that leftists are inherently dishonest?

I'm not lying, you're just not following the point, which I'm okay with, sometimes winning happens without the other person's knowledge.

Next time, just quote what I actually post instead of your "journalistic" rephrasing.

I do not think you have any concept of honesty.

[jediuser598]

@jedi

That’s an abstract equation though, we were talking about the kind of proof a journalist gathers

Just trying to set up a foundation for an argument, basically asking, do you believe in fundamental logic? If you do, good.

Say you take a picture of someone skateboarding.

What can you say with 100% certainty?

Suppose I take a pic of someone skateboarding, is that the premise? Abstractly, the conclusion is the premise, just as A=A.

In real life, I take a picture, I might wake up from a dream. Now, in real life I could say with 100% certainty that it appeared to whatever perceives things which I identify as "myself" that at that moment I took a picture. Yet that evidence is only available to one person, which is why in journalism nothing is 100%

Journalists have to presuppose that this reality is our reality and that the universal deceiver isn't a thing and that this isn't just a dream. You can't tell truth inside of a system that by definition, truth can't be told, or truth can't be discovered, or that truth can't be proven. Journalists center around truth (or they should) and if that's technically impossible then there are no journalists, so arguing about corrupt journalists would be a moot point because a non-corrupt one is impossible, because even truth itself is corrupt.

Say we assume that truth itself is not corrupt and that we can know truth.

How do we get at truth then? A camera is a good way. If we weight truth vs doubt, a camera is a good way to put a lot of weight on the truth side, where it'd be hard to doubt something like a picture, or a series of pictures.

A journalist not only has to gather facts, but has to gather proof of the facts.

So you take a picture of a skateboarder, what can you attest to other people?

Only that you took a picture of a skateboarder?

Nothing about the picture itself?

[JohnDonne]

No. You obviously lied again, which is ironic considering what you are defending. weren't you just disputing the idea that leftists are inherently dishonest?

I'm not lying, you're just not following the point, which I'm okay with, sometimes winning happens without the other person's knowledge.

Next time, just quote what I actually post instead of your "journalistic" rephrasing.

I do not think you have any concept of honesty.

How many times do people have to highlight your own words back at you after you accuse them of lying for you to think before you make the accusation. And no, I'm not doing it this time, you say I'm lying, you prove it.

[Speaker to Animals]

Photagraphy is one of the easiest ways to manipulate people precisely because people believe as you do. Journalists use photographs to deceive every single day.

[Speaker to Animals]

I'm not lying, you're just not following the point, which I'm okay with, sometimes winning happens without the other person's knowledge.

Next time, just quote what I actually post instead of your "journalistic" rephrasing.

I do not think you have any concept of honesty.

How many times do people have to highlight your own words back at you after you accuse them of lying for you to think before you make the accusation. And no, I'm not doing it this time, you say I'm lying, you prove it.

You did not highlight anything. You typed a straw man and then attributed it to me.

Since you are unable to help yourself from lying, I encourage you to use my actual words.

[jediuser598]

Photagraphy is one of the easiest wats to manipulate people precisely because people believe as you do. Journalists use photographs to deceive every single day.

You don't believe there is such a thing as an honest journalist. Arguing about truth and journalism with you is an exercise in futility because you don't believe such a thing exists.

[Speaker to Animals]

Remember this photograph?



It was propaganda.

[Speaker to Animals]

Photagraphy is one of the easiest wats to manipulate people precisely because people believe as you do. Journalists use photographs to deceive every single day.

You don't believe there is such a thing as an honest journalist. Arguing about truth and journalism with you is an exercise in futility because you don't believe such a thing exists.

No. If this person is calling himself a journalist and pretending to be some objective source of information, then he is clearly not honest. No such thing exists.

How many times do you people have to get burned by fake news to grasp this?? Seriously.

[jediuser598]

Remember this photograph?



It was propaganda.

Where did I say photographs can't deceive?

If I take a close, medium, and long shot, then that is going to tell more of the story than just a close shot.

One photograph isn't enough. Of course one photo can deceive, but you get more photos of the same event and you start getting a better picture of what is going on.