Why the GOP embraces conspiracy theories and denialism

[honorentheos]

People in general. Which includes you.

Oh.

Thank you for telling me something I already knew.

Yet you asked.

[Dr. Shades]

Yet you asked.

I already knew the "Information can be accurate and leave a person with a false sense of understanding. If you aren't able to consume information on long formats, you are very likely overconfident in how well you understand subjects you are only nibbling at. Most of what you assume to be understanding came from your prior beliefs and biases. You cannot extrapolate the universe out of a crumb of cake. You can project your imagined universe out from said crumb, though" part. What I didn't know was whether "you" meant me personally or meant the royal "you."

Hence the question.

[Hawkeye]

One good example is even moderate leftists like Sam Harris have admitted out loud that they are all in favor of covering up stories like Hunter Biden's influence pedaling to foreign countries with a 10% cut for the big guy if it stops Donald Trump from becoming president. Can I prove that there were enough falsified ballots to steal the 2020 election? No, but the fact is that the left had the motive, the means, and the opportunity to steal that election. If it requires balllot harvesting, lying in the media, using COVID as an excuse to go around state laws on early voting and absentee ballots, weaponizing the justice department against Trump, then democacy be damned, they're going to try to disenfranchise the votes of people they disagree with any way they can.

[honorentheos]

Yet you asked.

I already knew the "Information can be accurate and leave a person with a false sense of understanding. If you aren't able to consume information on long formats, you are very likely overconfident in how well you understand subjects you are only nibbling at. Most of what you assume to be understanding came from your prior beliefs and biases. You cannot extrapolate the universe out of a crumb of cake. You can project your imagined universe out from said crumb, though" part. What I didn't know was whether "you" meant me personally or meant the royal "you."

Hence the question.

You needed to be told if it was including you or singularly you?

The point of the comment is that your approach leads to being poorly informed and overconfident about your understand of a topic. In the context of this thread, YOU, Dr. Shades have no idea what's going on.

[honorentheos]

One good example is even moderate leftists like Sam Harris have admitted out loud that they are all in favor of covering up stories like Hunter Biden's influence pedaling to foreign countries with a 10% cut for the big guy if it stops Donald Trump from becoming president. Can I prove that there were enough falsified ballots to steal the 2020 election? No, but the fact is that the left had the motive, the means, and the opportunity to steal that election. If it requires balllot harvesting, lying in the media, using COVID as an excuse to go around state laws on early voting and absentee ballots, weaponizing the justice department against Trump, then democacy be damned, they're going to try to disenfranchise the votes of people they disagree with any way they can.

You sound like Lot telling lunatic God of you can ding just one prominent person who says a thing you can feel justified in believing it reflects a majority view. So who needs facts or discussion? Truth seeking is about ferreting out semi-celebrity quotes to use as arguments. To be fair there are plenty of folks who vote Democrat who do the same. It's a confirmation bias-affirming approach regardless of who does it, though.

The Hunter laptop story has been discussed extensively. The snippet of email you quoted isn't any more evidence of Joe Biden financially profiting from office than any statement about a third party could be. It's evidence against Hunter Biden as a shady dude whose moral compass got left in a drawer s long time ago. But that's it.

You don't engage in discussions past the point the facts challenge your biases. Why do you think that is?

[Dr. Shades]

You needed to be told if it was including you or singularly you?

Not so much "needed" as "wanted." You know, for clarification's sake.

The point of the comment is that your approach leads to being poorly informed and overconfident about your understand of a topic.

Oh, I'm never overconfident about my understanding of a topic. That's why I ask for clarification as often as I do. So you don't need to worry about that anymore.

In the context of this thread, YOU, Dr. Shades have no idea what's going on.

Then instead of wasting keystrokes going off on philosophical tangents that I'm entirely familiar with anyway, will you please summarize what's going on, on the context of this thread?*

*Because I'm not overconfident about my understanding of this topic.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

One good example is even moderate leftists like Sam Harris have admitted out loud that they are all in favor of covering up stories like Hunter Biden's influence pedaling to foreign countries with a 10% cut for the big guy if it stops Donald Trump from becoming president. Can I prove that there were enough falsified ballots to steal the 2020 election? No, but the fact is that the left had the motive, the means, and the opportunity to steal that election. If it requires balllot harvesting, lying in the media, using COVID as an excuse to go around state laws on early voting and absentee ballots, weaponizing the justice department against Trump, then democacy be damned, they're going to try to disenfranchise the votes of people they disagree with any way they can.

That’s weird. Sam Harris was making the rounds on right-wing sites yesterday, and out of the blue Ajax shows up referencing Sam Harris talking about Hunter Biden. Weird. Weird that. What are the odds?

- Doc

[Gadianton]

Can I prove that there were enough falsified ballots to steal the 2020 election? No

It's worse than that, Ajax. You can't prove that a single ballot was falsified to steal the 2020 election for Biden. You can't provide a hypothetical scenario where that could have been accomplished. Try it, put your abilities to lie to the test and explain to us how it could happen. You've practiced a lot on this board. I don't mean provide a hypothetical scenario where enough votes were secured to steal the election for Biden, I mean provide a hypothetical example where " balllot harvesting, lying in the media, using COVID as an excuse to go around state laws on early voting and absentee ballots, weaponizing the justice department against Trump" could provide for a single falsified vote in favor of Biden.

[honorentheos]

You needed to be told if it was including you or singularly you?

Not so much "needed" as "wanted." You know, for clarification's sake.

The point of the comment is that your approach leads to being poorly informed and overconfident about your understand of a topic.

Oh, I'm never overconfident about my understanding of a topic. That's why I ask for clarification as often as I do. So you don't need to worry about that anymore.

In the context of this thread, YOU, Dr. Shades have no idea what's going on.

Then instead of wasting keystrokes going off on philosophical tangents that I'm entirely familiar with anyway, will you please summarize what's going on, on the context of this thread?*

*Because I'm not overconfident about my understanding of this topic.

You're overconfident in the ability to gain understanding from someone providing a summary. It's the exact opposite of what is needed to engage in critical thinking. Summaries don't yield understanding. They merely inform one what the subject may be.

[Dr. Shades]

You're overconfident in the ability to gain understanding from someone providing a summary. It's the exact opposite of what is needed to engage in critical thinking. Summaries don't yield understanding. They merely inform one what the subject may be.

Then please summarize the understanding I should have of it.