No, you don't get to redefine what's reasonable and what's speculative here, no. Not when you've spent the majority of your effort on this thread carrying on like you're searching for an imaginary wild hair that you insist on telling everyone about.
Don't think I haven't noted that you're merely sounding the alarm rather than actually explaining
how my conclusion is unreasonable. I've also noted the false dichotomy you've constructed between "reasonable" and "speculative," as if they're mutually exclusive.
At any rate, I haven't redefined anything. Reputable news agencies have reported the items that would lead anyone to believe that the attacks are related to Islamic fundamentalism.
No backup = crank, by your lights. Sorry about that.
No backup? I was correcting her to the best of my knowledge. Besides, I'm right. Go look it up. I believe Bells provided a link.
It isn't even remotely like that,
Yes it is. You got called out on some ignorant BS, and now you're trying to change the rules. It's typical crank behavior.
No, it is not a complete answer in this fucking case. Are you seriously trying to tell me you have no idea of the difference between specific instance and generalized rule? "Oh, well what Geoff really meant was that it never is a complete answer. It never is, that's what he was saying. That's why I'm so riled up!" Because, you see, Napolitano must, as the Homeland Security Secretary, have only a passing familiarity with every aspect of this guy's relation or non-relation to the crime. That's why she doesn't fucking know. I get it! Because she only stepped into the job last week, and really, she thought it was about stenography. "Think about what you're saying". Yeah, I like that phrase. That's a very pertinent phrase, right now.
If by "in this case," you mean "whenever it's a politician," then okay, but it's still not discriminating enough to make you look any better. Did we already forget your rationale for your "skepticism," (which we later learned wasn't skepticism at all, but outright disbelief in the official story, and belief in an alternative, crank-based story) in the first place?
you said:
Or, more generally: No, I don't trust a bunch of rich bastards, because I know better. And no, I don't trust officials - elected or otherwise - because I know better.
Yeah..."In this case" my ass.
Fuck that shit from the word "go", kid. I'm discussing, you semi-literate chimpanzee, because skeptical. If you don't know the difference between "jaded" and "skeptical", don't use them in a sentence. Just don't.
Wow! Hit a nerve, huh?
To quote you again:
because I know better.[/b] And no, I don't trust officials - elected or otherwise - because I know better.
Jaded.
And you're not skeptical. You've already said you suspect that he is being deported, meaning that you've already
decided that Napolitano is lying.
Beats feeling around for the appropriate surfer-venue parlance. I haven't even bothered to scan up to see what this sentence is meant to refer to, because frankly I couldn't be arsed to do so. I'm content to only conceive of the incredible non-meaning it must impart to this discussion, so much so that I actually prefer to let it take flight in the imagination like a flock of pigeons, eating trash and casting deluges of pale speckled shit onto the blog-o-sphere. That's what your commentary means to me.
Yes yes, you can't be bothered, yet you're red-faced and beating your chest like a gorilla. I've never met anyone who could be apathetic so
angrily.
And here's another thing: that you're compelled, somehow, to treat every sarcastic comment as somehow so inimical to your personality that you have to lever it up into a defense of your own - admittedly modest - self-worth. Fuck me, am I arguing with a teenager here? Put your daddy on the line. Tell him you've been using the intertubes for the bad medicine again, Daddy.
Wow. How embarrassed must you be to reduce yourself to
this?
Honestly, I started this just to correct the error in your thinking, not to give you a heart attack. It's okay, Geoff, nobody in your real life has to know about this. No reason to burst blood vessels over it.
I bolded the relevant parts for you, not that I think it will help much. But good job, Poindexter: a decision. A finality. A binary selection. Do you goddamn get the distinction between that and a suspicion or opinion yet? The answer is right fucking there. How stupid do you have to be to miss this?
I don't know whether I should be more surprised by your desperation, or your knack for getting the meaning of words wrong. Here, I'll play the highlight game as well.
1. an act or instance of judging.
2. the ability to judge, make a decision,
or form an opinion objectively, authoritatively, and wisely, especially in matters affecting action; good sense; discretion: a man of sound judgment.
3. the demonstration or exercise of such ability or capacity: The major was decorated for the judgment he showed under fire.
4.
the forming of an opinion, estimate, notion, or conclusion, as from circumstances presented to the mind: Our judgment as to the cause of his failure must rest on the evidence.
5.
the opinion formed: He regretted his hasty judgment.
Of course, "conclusion" and "decision" are not antonyms of "suspicion." In fact, "believe" is listed as a synonym of "suspect." And as I noted before, one cannot believe something while also withholding that belief in lieu of more information, and to "suspect" something is to believe it.
Bottom line is that you can't do both. Clearly, you were simply giving lip service to reserving your judgment. You made that clear when you outright said you suspected a different theory to be true, as well as when you admitted that you simply disbelieve officials--elected or otherwise--because of your past experience. (jaded, remember?)
Unfortunately for you, suspicion is not synonymous with all the above definitions. At best you can get notion, maybe even estimate, but the unfortunate failing of your half-assed synthesis is that I haven't even made a goddamned estimate of the situation yet, you half-educated sycophant. Let me spell this out to you: I'm not your underpaid English teacher with an afternoon 'drinksy' problem, or your equally intellectually obtuse mommy. I'm not paid to walk "JDawg" through his series of maudlin, teen-angst-fueled rage-against-someone's-machine, mommy-didn't-love-me-enough-to-see-I-was-always right personality issues. Sure sure: suspicion is decision, and conclusion, on your end of the screen. Not on everyone else's, but not everyone else has your sense of emotional entitlement.
But you've done
exactly what you say you haven't. Suspecting something means believing it. It's really
that simple, Geoff. All the crotch-grabbing and shit-flinging isn't going to change that. I know you'll hope it
distracts from that, but that's the best you can do at this point. Well, short of admitting your error, and the ill-considered choice to stick to your guns, and apologize for being a dick. But I'm trying to be realistic here.
And of any of the absurd miscreant comments to come out of this bar-none absurdly pithy 'discussion' - largely consisting of you demanding I hold up your semi-intellectual dartboard - this has to be the most stupid. "I showed you where you didn't live up to being my daddy, and now you deal with it!" I'd ask if you could possibly be serious, but I fucking know you are being serious, because you're utterly, indisputably, SF's biggest and most malodorous twat. No, really. At the least the philosophical fascists and the outright lunatics have the decency to frame their bullshit in some kind of refutable manner, instead of weaseling around every point with the dexterity of a child abuser chasing adolescent dick. So where? Where is it, asshole? Where's this to be found, this post where you a-showed me my un-integritee n'such? Where'd this happen? Jesus, do you have the emotional honesty to do that much? Or is this whole thing going to end in another frustrated plea for the attention you didn't get, like trying to force people to run a rat maze that you've yanked the cheese out of?
I have to admit, short of Bells comparing me to a mass-murderer, I've never seen this big a display of "HOLY SHIT I BIT OFF MORE THAN I CAN CHEW QUICK LOOK AT THIS EXPLOSION OVER HERE LOUD NOISES SPARKS BIG COLORS OMG I GOTTA GET OUTTA HERE!!!!" on the forum before. Quite a dazzling display. None of it is relevant, of course, and, as usual, the one sentence dedicated to the topic fails to support your claim.
I end this way:
.... did. You. Even. READ the fucking link? When they say they have sources claiming these things, it means they have sources claiming these things. If they don't really have such sources, that's journalistic fraud. As dense as you clearly must be, you cannot possibly be so stupid as to have missed that most essential fact, unless you've chosen to take up your favourite windmilling lance without doing the tiniest bit of effort reading through the argument. Which, I guess, actually is believable in your case. What, do you work at the Blaze and are desperately hoping to fend off allegations by leaning on the thin veneer of your - arguable - personality? I wouldn't count too hard on that one.
So let me get this straight: The only possible outcome of them claiming they have sources saying X when X isn't true is that they made up the source? It couldn't possibly be that
their sources are full of shit?
Seriously, take a breath, or a pill, or whatever it is you use to come down from your internet tough guy rage, and
think.
I just realized something here: did you actually change your SF moniker from the laughable "JDawg" to - almost unbelievably - to a dragon from Game of Thrones?
Actually, it's a dragon from
A Song of Ice and Fire, the fantasy series from which the TV show
Game of Thrones is adapted.
Nothing I've written about you so far could possibly be more demeaning than that.
There are people who have named their children after characters in the books. Adopting one as a screen name on an anonymous internet forum is pretty mild by comparison.
At any rate, you've only demeaned yourself with what you've written in this, and other posts. This is a pretty gross side of you on display here. I'm pretty sure I could adopt the name of a
unicorn and feel better about it than you should about this world-class tantrum you've thrown.
Was I really discussing things with you?
At the beginning, yes. But not recently. Once you realized you were in over your head, you started behaving like a troll.
Holy shit. Before you meet up with the rest of your Steampunk clan, do you call each other so that you don't all end up wearing the same stripey black sweater? I can imagine how that would be a little embarrassing.
Stripey black sweater? I'm afraid I'm not as up on my steampunk references as you. Who wears stripey black sweaters?
And ASoIaF isn't steampunk, but you knew that already.
