Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "PowerfulJRE"
channel.
-
1100
-
618
-
90
-
73
-
59
-
34
-
24
-
22
-
20
-
19
-
18
-
16
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
@gerk7238 The scientific method is a method of multiple working hypotheses. You don't rule anything out, and you lean towards the theory that fits the facts in the most simple way (Occam's Razor - the simpler explanation is preferred/more likely).
Wuhan Lab was at the epicenter. They were doing research on this precise strain of bat virus. Early on, we heard of scientists being sent home with corona-like symptoms in November 2019. The prima facie evidence is that it most likely got loose out of the lab, and that theory should've stood as at LEAST as probable as other theories, and more investigation needed to be done. What happened, instead, was the guy who SENT THE MONEY OVER TO WUHAN, Peter Daszak, was the guy whose word everybody took, without fact-checking - indeed, FaceBook made him their head fact-checker!
And you know how THEY knew he had no conflict of interest? His word that he had no conflict of interest.
And if you have no sense that theories embarrassing to China and Fauci's Funders were ruthlessly and arbitrarily suppressed as "debunked" without ANY real investigative reporting being done, then you haven't been paying attention. The fact that they got it all wrong can NOT be called "an honest mistake." It was pure censorship, implemented by the very person who was likely complicit in the creation of the virus.
What YOU do is take the word of ONE GUY you decide to make the arbiter of truth, and then think it's OK to silence all competing theories. That's authoritarian bullshit. That's not how we produce knowledge in the West. That's now how we judge truth in the West. We spent millennia refining how we measure truth and reason to a better understanding of the world around us. Science. You know? All that stuff that made this conversation in the comments section possible?
Nope. Once they make it political, nobody cares about truth any more, because to them, the truth is already absolutely known.
You make a big show of "following the facts and evidence," but it is clear by the abject FAILURES that our leaders were not following facts and evidence, and many of the measures imposed did more harm than good.
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
@randomuser1596 I've only hung out with rock and artifact hounds in and West of the Rockies. I don't keep track of it, but I went to some digs up in Gunnison, and got an earful of the political in-fighting over competing theories. Seemed like if there's room for disagreement, everybody should just work together to find out as much as possible, but it sounded like the two schools of thought were in contention for grant money, and it got political.
MY main takeaway from rubbing shoulders with the anthro/archaeo crowd was how extensive the trade routes were. Obsidian points showing up 1,000 miles from their source, etc. Flint and obsidian sites were widely known and people traded finished products and raw materials far and wide, as far back as you'd care to go. That came as sort of a shock to me, at first, but not every valley's gonna have a handy source of flint or obsidian. But people were pretty much everywhere and most were using stone tools.
They almost certainly traded furs, too, but there's no record of that. The stone tools last forever in the ground.
4
-
Nobody's perfect. Diversify your sources and fact-check all of them. EPOCH Times, Hoover Institute, American Thought Leaders, and others make a good counter-balance. There are some who make a real attempt to be objective and report the facts, but the press has always had its slant, one way or the other, either in the way they spin the stories or more importantly, how they cherry-pick what stories to report.
It's always been this way, but since Hitler, the entire West has pretty much done what Hitler did, in the name of fighting what Hitler did. "Fairness Doctrine" and other myths created to give the impression that the major news outlets are objective, when they're not. Just see who pays their bills and who owns them, and you know who they will lie for.
I just watched a thing on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and it's spent something like $320 million on media all over the world, and is the single biggest non-governmental funding source for WHO and FDA.
4
-
4
-
4
-
@oiitzME1266 : Meh. Textbook publishers set their prices according to orders already taken, before they eaven move one book. Every book they sell, new, after that, is at that same price and is immensely profitable to the textbook company. BUT they're not in the business of printing extra copies just in case somebody randomly comes along, later. There are some, but not a whole lot beyond what they originally had contracts for.
Or that's the way it used to be. They're going through some tough times, right now, with everybody going to open source. The best deal is probably the online license, because it comes with a teacher who's always awake, always ready to take your questions, and who grades your work, instantly. Learning management systems aren't perfect, but they can do a lot of the heavy lifting in education, with very little human interference. IOW, for free.
3
-
3
-
There's always a tension between the collective and the individual. Pakman fosters the illusion that all we need is a sufficiently competent, ethical, and enlightened leadership telling the collective what to do and allocate resources on the collective's behalf, for the benefit of all individuals. The trouble is, you rarely get competent, ethical and enlightened leadership. And it's always the duds who want the most control, just the like the worst driver in the room wants to show you how good their reflexes are out on the road.
See? We're DRAFTING! Great fuel efficiency! *CRASH*. Everything would've been fine if that asshole in front of me hadn't slammed the brakes. It's that other guy's fault. Pakman's totally shilling for Democrats.
So Trump's not a great speaker. He gets his point across. And if you watch him fence with hostile reporters (like Obama never did) off the cuff, he comes off better, thinking on his feet than any of the Democrat candidates. And no, you're not going to explain away how out of it Joe Biden is by micro-analyzing Trump's body language. I'm about 30 minutes in, and all I'm hearing are Democrat talking points. Give it up. Join Jimmy Dore, who's at least honest about what he sees in a very common-sensical way. He's a hopeless lefty, but he's not makin' shit up to fit his narrative. And I bet he can find 100s of Democrat 'experts' who'll spin you all the things that are wrong with Trump. Use your eyes and your brain and not your hopes and wishes, dude.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3