Like, no matter how hard Sushy tries to lay sick burns, he unwittingly makes my point for me by indicating he was able to digest the content of the things we post, which is the entire point of posting them! Do we think he'd have any idea what we were posting if they were 2hr videos? Lol!

He's incapable of actually reading or understanding what has been said.

At least you have stopped denying that you post fake news, goofy.

That's a step in the right direction.

I don't; that wording would suggest I do so regularly. I have, on accident, once or twice, as have many people in this forum, on both sides, including people you give a pass to because they agree with your political beliefs. Meanwhile, there are hundreds more posts you have no response to, because you are too cowardly to admit the Cheeto's faults. (or on other subjects, like the Youtubes, where you have to deflect because you have nothing)

Is it possible they just read very, very slowly?

You should take the time to go down the youtube rabbit hole of anti-SJW videos. Their POV is clearly winning the culture war on that platform, though I'm not sure what to make of that when it doesn't seem to be as much of a force on other social media platforms.

I think you already provided some good critiques of a few videos from "The Academic Agent" a few months ago. Jordan Peterson is a scholar who has become very popular very fast by providing intellectual cover for many of the anti-feminist/anti-trans/anti-SJW types on youtube. I just heard a podcast with him and Joe Rogan that was very interesting and entertaining. Rogan declared it his favorite podcast of all time. So Peterson is still gaining wide popularity and influence, and you'll find yourself arguing against his ideas one way or another whether you ignore him on youtube or not.

Yeah, but you also post links and quotes from unconfirmed stories with unnamed sources which is just as bad as fake news imo.

I like to have stories confirmed with named sources before I take much notice of them.

I only put up with Lord's videos because they were short and he was actually here and might discuss them. I don't actually consider myself to be such a WARRIOR for SOCIAL JUSTICE that I need to take on the mission of rebutting every random ass youtube. Plus AFAICT a lot of the time it's just complaining about dumb college students on tumblr/youtube/whatever, and I'm like yeah there's some dumb college students on tumblr. Not really much to respond to there.

And then there's stuff like Peterson's opposition to the 57 pronouns or whatever, which seems mostly like a strawman most of the time. In any case I would also oppose laws which generally force people to use some specific language for gender under threat of prosecution, so meh? Of course, that's not what the Canadian law actually does.

Bolded the important part of that for you. You're alone on that island and nobody cares. Even Donald Trump, after he writes 5 tweets raging at the fake news liberal media, will go have a staff member give an anonymous quote to newspaper reporters if there's a story that will make his administration look good.

How'd you like the whole Israeli intelligence saga, btw? Funny how the news was initially released from anonymous sources while H.R. McMaster went on TV and said "it didn't happen". We all know which one of those two you believed (he was named, it must be legit!), how'd that work out for you?

Good reply, though you could have reached this conclusion about him a long time ago. I think this probably means you're a better person than the rest of us for giving him the benefit of the doubt, though if you search for his failure to cite references for his claims that black people have a genetic hormonal imbalance that's responsible for their underachievement you may find those doubts disappear.

I didn't respond to any juan posts for months, so it's not like a recent conclusion. But sometimes I get bored or I have work that I don't want to do, and I lack a sufficient amount of self-control. It's a character flaw to be sure, but what can I do. It's probably genetic. :P

We ought to have a discussion about youtube as a political source. I don't think it is fair to say that all youtube videos are unreliable, or unscientific, or even unhelpful to a political discussion. It is fair to say, as well named has said, that it takes a lot of time to watch videos, so they are less productive/efficient than written material. Also, they tend not to cite sources as much. Good criticisms. But useless, or not scientific - mistaken.

They're also bad for viewing at work.

yeah im pretty sure i clearly backed my claims there

i dont care what you care about

thanks for explaining well named
your sources are twitter and websites

wtf is wrong with you? are you seriously incapable of saying something that embarrasses you?

your sources aren't actually twitter and websites. its the authors of the articles. i guess we could call them journalists if we use the word journalist loosely

my sources are experts in their field. their opinion is based on the research they are referencing. these are university professors who aren't exactly motivated to lie on camera and share it with the world. would their opinion be more valid to you if its in a tweet linking to a vox article?


right. exactly. thats why i dont bother. nobody is going to listen to some expert when they have sjw's that can comfirm their bias

i learned my lesson from trying to help sjw's learn something about their behavior the last time i posted this conversation


heres something to chew on for the citation police. youre coming up with absolute nonsense perpetuated by dopey "research" that perpetuates the 77 cent wage gap myth. you have obama and clinton perpetuating these myths. an 8th grader could debunk this. you also repeat the nonsense from journalists and other SJW's. this is why you get demolished in topic after topic

heres a conversation that just happened at harvard. dr peterson almost got fired for saying he hypothetically wouldnt say zhe or zher. if you think hes making this stuff up and posting it on line with no evidence to back him, you clearly think hes on a career suicide mission

im sure the citation police are already on top of this though

19:10-24:23

No.

My complaint isn't about who the sources are, it's about the format of the information. A 2hr Youtube video can't be digested in under 2 hours (or maybe you can play at 1.5x speed in 80 minutes? still awful), even if the same content could be read in 20 minutes. I'm simply expressing amazement that it is exclusively right wingers here that have this defect of preferring to receive and disseminate information in the least efficient way possible, and theorizing that maybe it's because your brain wasn't built to process things any faster than that. Do you have any youtubes that dive into the question of why the alt right loves youtubes so much?

the reason ant-sjw's win is because when they aren't censored and forced to debate, the demolish sjws with the truth. they function in echo chambers. you will find endless "anti-sjw's" willing to debate. where are all the intellectual SJW's hiding? think about it

just look at well named's wonderful world of race, crime, and poverty. it totally contradicts and cant deal with reliable science. it completely falls apart under scrutiny. he cant even attempt to answer racial disparity in sport because his completely false pov creates a moral panic. are you aware of the mountains of material he had written on the topic and not once mentioned the massive racial disparity in single parent homes. to say this is a missing piece or hole would be an understatement. when i introduced it to the discussion he tried to explain to me that black people arent responsible for their mating habits and parenting (or absence) decisions

everything is a massive effort to confirm bias

who do you think has more bias? evolutionary and behavioral psychologists that have been professors for over a decade or professors in gender and racial studies? seriously, who is looking at things scientifically or objectively? The SJW professors actually state that gender is a social construct and deny what biologists tell us

its shouldnt amaze you that SJW's can sum up a complex issue in a tweet while actual scientists cant

I mean, you say it so it must be true? I don't really have much in the way of a predetermined side, but it looked to me like WN has torn you a new one at every turn since I started reading this subforum. Maybe if you weren't so concerned about ego and pride and winning, you might let your guard down and learn something.

Actual scientists publish papers that can be linked to here.

How about it?

Let's start with some academic publications that support your deeply held and repeated contention that black people have a different hormonal balance to whites etc which is responsible for them underachieving.

Surely a genetic breakthrough like this must be easy to reference?

ask him about the racial disparity in the NBA or USA track n field. then when he runs away in a moral panic completely unable to grapple with obvious reality, keep telling yourself how accurate his social theories are. he has mountains of info and not once did he address the massive disparity in single parent homes. he also didnt mention the color blind affect of poverty and single parent homes. i had to hold his hand through all of this and his response was to deny black people are responsible for their mating habits. which is what you call behavior. which is actually a chain of decisions

its actually a display of comical bias with zero interest in truth and mass delusion and lazer focus on confirming bias

you have proven to dishonest and unethical repeatedly. dont misrepresent me

if youre unable to understand the content and have to resort trying to present things you get to call racist on my behalf, perhaps you should also refer back to the psychologists that take 2 hours to break down the complete absence of any superior morality in sjw's and a whole bunch of bitterness and resentment

I ignored your questions about the NBA because you made no attempt to demonstrate how the racial composition of the NBA is relevant to the topic of racial disparities in crime rates. But it also seems likely the line of argument would dovetail back into the conversation with ChrisV from that thread. As I think I said the first time you brought this up, my refusal to engage in a derail that I consider irrelevant doesn't prevent you from making whatever argument you might want to make. If you were to actually try to elucidate a point, I'd probably respond to it.

As far as the relationship between single-parent families, poverty, and crime, that thread was focused on issues in the criminal justice system as elaborated upon in a specific textbook. The main purpose of the thread (at least the OPs) was to present research on police shootings and other kinds of discrimination in the criminal justice system. I included a very brief and insufficient outline of an argument from strain theory and concentrated poverty. As I explained before, the thread is based almost entirely on a specific textbook -- which doesn't discuss single parent families as a cause of crime -- hence the lack of discussion on that point. I believe the first time you brought this up I conceded that it was reasonable to point it out as an oversight. Although it might be less reasonable to expect me to have presented a comprehensive assessment of the topic in a forum thread. On the other hand, my very brief outline also conceded the importance of other cultural issues and you've done nothing to show how that specific data contradicts any of my views.

Back in time a few months we go....



Ok you dishonest PoS , where is this claimed "conversation between two actual experts"... "time stamped when and where they talk about the impact of testosterone. they briefly describe the science" (lol @ "briefly").

No, wait, let me guess.....talking heads on youtube?

should actually try to exhaust your attention span to 27:00