Topic: check, check, re check sources | |
---|---|
Yeah, yeah. The fact-checking sites don't support the negative false claims about President Obama, and so those sites must be wrong. ![]() Ever heard of Occam's Razor? liberals are liberals, they lie... so a liberal run website won't lie? wake up and smell the coffee... Wow, both an urban legend and ad hominem in one sentence. Perhaps you should read a little about Rich Buhler, the founder of TruthorFiction.com. WND: "Dean of Christian talk radio' succumbs to cancer" EthicsDaily.com: "Separating Truth from Fiction: An Interview with Rich Buhler" The Florida Times-Union (a.k.a.Jacksonville.com) published an article titled "Fact Check: So who's checking the fact-finders? We are". The article confirms the objectivity of TruthorFiction.com, Snopes.com, FactCheck.org and PolitiFact.com blah, blah, blah... you didn't even read the disclaimer on the site you posted... ![]() ![]() ![]() Yet, you have not proven that the fact-checking websites are wrong. huh.. and you haven't proven them right... Dude, those fact-checking sites provide documentation for what they say. |
|
|
|
Edited by
willing2
on
Mon 01/27/14 08:22 PM
|
|
Yeah, yeah. The fact-checking sites don't support the negative false claims about President Obama, and so those sites must be wrong. ![]() Ever heard of Occam's Razor? liberals are liberals, they lie... so a liberal run website won't lie? wake up and smell the coffee... Wow, both an urban legend and ad hominem in one sentence. Perhaps you should read a little about Rich Buhler, the founder of TruthorFiction.com. WND: "Dean of Christian talk radio' succumbs to cancer" EthicsDaily.com: "Separating Truth from Fiction: An Interview with Rich Buhler" The Florida Times-Union (a.k.a.Jacksonville.com) published an article titled "Fact Check: So who's checking the fact-finders? We are". The article confirms the objectivity of TruthorFiction.com, Snopes.com, FactCheck.org and PolitiFact.com blah, blah, blah... you didn't even read the disclaimer on the site you posted... ![]() ![]() ![]() Yet, you have not proven that the fact-checking websites are wrong. huh.. and you haven't proven them right... Dude, those fact-checking sites provide documentation for what they say. Dude. Most of the list was reported by LIBERAL MSFKINM. Some be suffrin frum deficatedserebrum syndrome. |
|
|
|
Yeah, yeah. The fact-checking sites don't support the negative false claims about President Obama, and so those sites must be wrong. ![]() Ever heard of Occam's Razor? liberals are liberals, they lie... so a liberal run website won't lie? wake up and smell the coffee... Wow, both an urban legend and ad hominem in one sentence. Perhaps you should read a little about Rich Buhler, the founder of TruthorFiction.com. WND: "Dean of Christian talk radio' succumbs to cancer" EthicsDaily.com: "Separating Truth from Fiction: An Interview with Rich Buhler" The Florida Times-Union (a.k.a.Jacksonville.com) published an article titled "Fact Check: So who's checking the fact-finders? We are". The article confirms the objectivity of TruthorFiction.com, Snopes.com, FactCheck.org and PolitiFact.com blah, blah, blah... you didn't even read the disclaimer on the site you posted... ![]() ![]() ![]() Yet, you have not proven that the fact-checking websites are wrong. huh.. and you haven't proven them right... Dude, those fact-checking sites provide documentation for what they say. Dude. Most of the list was reported by LIBERAL MSFKINM. Some be suffrin frum deficatedserebrum syndrome. i didn't want to tell him they just post what the government says, just like msm, msnbc, all the liberal sided media... the they don't INVESTIGATE anything...they just take it at the WH press face value, which is lies, then they reprint what the WH says... I'll believe the independent news reporting, they have a reason to investigate things... |
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Mon 01/27/14 09:50 PM
|
|
http://www.tctimes.com/news/it-s-true-because-the-internet-said-so-right/article_cbb36a80-8373-11e3-965b-0019bb2963f4.html According to the Internet, it was President Abraham Lincoln who said, “The problem with Internet quotes is that you can’t always depend on their accuracy.” The sentence is often used to point out how unreliable some information can be when it comes to websites. If you found yourself questioning whether Lincoln’s ‘quote’ was ever true, it may be time to visit new sites. If you’re looking for the most useful and persuasive information, try to find information that is objective, which Merriam Webster defines as “based on facts rather than feelings or opinions.” ...... In order to get the best, most well-rounded view of an issue, people should read from multiple websites and news sources. While news outlets should strive to remain objective and keep their opinions out of reporting, that is not always the case. While these websites listed by the Times is a good start, consider reading from as many different viewpoints as possible. Conservative, liberal, independent, feminist, patriarchal, religious, secular — the more opinions and facts you are exposed to, the more you can strengthen your own criticisms and opinions. Many are incapable of determining fact from opinion, nor are they able to critique sources and we see this repeatedly on internet message boards and forums. The ability to critique sources with a modicum of objectivity is usually the realm of the graduate and not the average person. Furthermore, the ability to read a wide range of material won't guarantee any form of objectivity. Many will dismiss something out of hand based upon personal prejudice and confirmation bias, while others lack the empathy required to assess a point of view on its merits. Let's face it, many armchair politicians/historians/psychologists/generals or whatever really don't know a subject beyond a somewhat superficial understanding of the complexities and relationships involved for a given topic. |
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Mon 01/27/14 10:50 PM
|
|
http://www.tctimes.com/news/it-s-true-because-the-internet-said-so-right/article_cbb36a80-8373-11e3-965b-0019bb2963f4.html According to the Internet, it was President Abraham Lincoln who said, “The problem with Internet quotes is that you can’t always depend on their accuracy.” The sentence is often used to point out how unreliable some information can be when it comes to websites. If you found yourself questioning whether Lincoln’s ‘quote’ was ever true, it may be time to visit new sites. If you’re looking for the most useful and persuasive information, try to find information that is objective, which Merriam Webster defines as “based on facts rather than feelings or opinions.” ...... In order to get the best, most well-rounded view of an issue, people should read from multiple websites and news sources. While news outlets should strive to remain objective and keep their opinions out of reporting, that is not always the case. While these websites listed by the Times is a good start, consider reading from as many different viewpoints as possible. Conservative, liberal, independent, feminist, patriarchal, religious, secular — the more opinions and facts you are exposed to, the more you can strengthen your own criticisms and opinions. Many are incapable of determining fact from opinion, nor are they able to critique sources and we see this repeatedly on internet message boards and forums. The ability to critique sources with a modicum of objectivity is usually the realm of the graduate and not the average person. Furthermore, the ability to read a wide range of material won't guarantee any form of objectivity. Many will dismiss something out of hand based upon personal prejudice and confirmation bias, while others lack the empathy required to assess a point of view on its merits. Let's face it, many armchair politicians/historians/psychologists/generals or whatever really don't know a subject beyond a somewhat superficial understanding of the complexities and relationships involved for a given topic. that's true, I have 'heard' many things that were also posted on the internet a million times over , but from 'opinion' pieces which offered no FACTUAL or verifiable reference,,, which causes me to look FURTHER for what has a verifiable and reliable source,, but then many will feel the source the information is ABOUT is dishonest and so will rely on sources that are just reiterating allegations about the source,,, its a balancing act, but still, its best not to just believe anything that supports our biases, without further verification of its source, reliability, and the FACTs included as opposed to the spins and opinions,,, |
|
|
|
http://www.tctimes.com/news/it-s-true-because-the-internet-said-so-right/article_cbb36a80-8373-11e3-965b-0019bb2963f4.html According to the Internet, it was President Abraham Lincoln who said, “The problem with Internet quotes is that you can’t always depend on their accuracy.” The sentence is often used to point out how unreliable some information can be when it comes to websites. If you found yourself questioning whether Lincoln’s ‘quote’ was ever true, it may be time to visit new sites. If you’re looking for the most useful and persuasive information, try to find information that is objective, which Merriam Webster defines as “based on facts rather than feelings or opinions.” ...... In order to get the best, most well-rounded view of an issue, people should read from multiple websites and news sources. While news outlets should strive to remain objective and keep their opinions out of reporting, that is not always the case. While these websites listed by the Times is a good start, consider reading from as many different viewpoints as possible. Conservative, liberal, independent, feminist, patriarchal, religious, secular — the more opinions and facts you are exposed to, the more you can strengthen your own criticisms and opinions. Many are incapable of determining fact from opinion, nor are they able to critique sources and we see this repeatedly on internet message boards and forums. The ability to critique sources with a modicum of objectivity is usually the realm of the graduate and not the average person. Furthermore, the ability to read a wide range of material won't guarantee any form of objectivity. Many will dismiss something out of hand based upon personal prejudice and confirmation bias, while others lack the empathy required to assess a point of view on its merits. Let's face it, many armchair politicians/historians/psychologists/generals or whatever really don't know a subject beyond a somewhat superficial understanding of the complexities and relationships involved for a given topic. that's true, I have 'heard' many things that were also posted on the internet a million times over , but from 'opinion' pieces which offered no FACTUAL or verifiable reference,,, which causes me to look FURTHER for what has a verifiable and reliable source,, but then many will feel the source the information is ABOUT is dishonest and so will rely on sources that are just reiterating allegations about the source,,, its a balancing act, but still, its best not to just believe anything that supports our biases, without further verification of its source, reliability, and the FACTs included as opposed to the spins and opinions,,, i'm biased... barry lied way to many times |
|
|
|
They scan the threads and move them. They have many of mine. Looks like liberals get the free passes. The OP of this thread has nothing to do with liberalism. Try that straw man elsewhere. ![]() straw man noun 1: a weak or imaginary opposition (as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted 2: a person set up to serve as a cover for a usually questionable transaction So you found a new word and fell in love with it, but you really should learn to use it properly, Mr. Dodo. The OP is as liberal and leftist as they get, so that shoots the first definition so are you saying this would be a questionable transaction? The only questionable transaction would be your false defense of the OP. |
|
|
|
It's true isn't it? His internet was a guy riding on a horse hoping not to get shot. media is changing,,,nearly onstantly bt now there are many more 'sources' that aren't held to any type of standard of veracity or accuntability And of course it would be a sin to impose yours wouldn't it. That is unless it is about trampling another's rights. ![]() ![]() ![]() repeated for (neutral) clarity: media is changing,,,,nearly constantly but now there are many more 'sources' that aren't held to any type of standard of veracity or accountability yea, like the WH press secretary spewing barry's lies? Or hate-driven websites promoting false claims about President Obama. ![]() Only for those incapable of accepting the truth, Odumbo is the world's biggest liar. |
|
|
|
that's the chaos of the internet, people can write whatever they want in most cases with little accountability Ah, having a personal reflection moment are you! |
|
|
|
some people are to lazy to dig for facts. And some people reject facts that contradict their attempts to demonize the POTUS. Back when GWB occupied the Oval Office, Bush-haters accused Snopes.com of having a Republican/Conservative bias because the website didn't support the false anti-Bush claims spread by Bush-haters. Nowadays, Obama-haters accuse Snopes.com of having a Democrat/liberal bias because the website doesn't support the false anti-Obama claims made by Obama-haters. Really, so you are spouting that they told the truth about Bush but are lying about Odumbo. Get a grip, they are telling the truth all along. The one lying would be the one that can't face the facts, there is no difference between Bush and Odumbo, and if it wasn't for the paint job, they would even almost look alike. |
|
|
|
From TruthorFiction.com: First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner-Fiction! First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in- Fiction! First President to violate the War Powers Act. Fiction! First President to defy a Federal Judges court order to cease implementing the Health Care Reform Law.- Fiction! First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat. Fiction! First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S. , including those with criminal convictions- Fiction! First President to terminate Americas ability to put a man in space. Fiction! First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN)- Fiction! First President to hide his medical, educational and travel records.- Fiction! First President to publicly bow to Americas enemies while refusing to salute the U.S. Flag. Fiction! First President to refuse to wear the U.S. Flag lapel pin- Fiction! First President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife. - Fiction! Isn't this what this post is all about, believing the crap you find on the internet. |
|
|
|
truthorfiction is one of millions of sites that can be found ON GOOGLE,,,, ![]() Google just a search engine, don't guarantee truth or lie so just another example of how some just believe anything. Wasn't that what you are you were trying to imply? But that's ok, doesn't apply to you does it? |
|
|
|
truthorfiction is one of millions of sites that can be found ON GOOGLE,,,, ![]() try going to the source, instead of your liberal run lie sites... How about refraining from ad hominem attacks on fact-checking sites because those sites don't support your beliefs. So you would just be full of cute little words you pick up and just apply them willy nilly. So now if you don't like something it either "straw man" or "ad hominem". Well get a grip! You post crap, you leave yourself open to being challenged. You can't handle it, stop posting. |
|
|
|
Yeah, yeah. The fact-checking sites don't support the negative false claims about President Obama, and so those sites must be wrong. ![]() Ever heard of Occam's Razor? They usually are. And who cares, just another BS theory from the 14th Century but that does go nicely with your straw man and ad hominem declarations. And by the way, Odumbo is still the world's biggest liar, surpassing even the "Ice Queen" and Slick Willie. |
|
|
|
Misinformation works..
You defeat it by educating yourself. |
|
|
|
They scan the threads and move them. They have many of mine. Looks like liberals get the free passes. The OP of this thread has nothing to do with liberalism. Try that straw man elsewhere. ![]() straw man noun 1: a weak or imaginary opposition (as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted 2: a person set up to serve as a cover for a usually questionable transaction So you found a new word and fell in love with it, but you really should learn to use it properly, Mr. Dodo. The OP is as liberal and leftist as they get, so that shoots the first definition so are you saying this would be a questionable transaction? The only questionable transaction would be your false defense of the OP. yeah, these posts are more smoke screens and distractions and ad hominem attacks than strawmen |
|
|
|
Misinformation works.. You defeat it by educating yourself. the best paraphrase of the point of the OP yet,,,, finally |
|
|
|
Misinformation works.. You defeat it by educating yourself. the best paraphrase of the point of the OP yet,,,, finally cheers |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
|
Misinformation works.. You defeat it by educating yourself. there's a few that understand that... ![]() |
|
|