60,000 In NY. 800,000 Nationwide. FAKE!!

[PeteMoss]

34 minutes ago, Jacksonx3 said:

Politifact - gateway pundit

Politifact's analysis is opinion, not based on facts.

[The West Sider]

50 minutes ago, Jacksonx3 said:

Confirmation bias is indeed one of our most basic biases. Add to it the Dunning-Kruger effect, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of people in general.  In a nutshell, those with less expertise are actually less receptive to new information on a topic than those with significant expertise.  The combination leads to lots of people, sure that they are correct, talking past each other.  

Very interesting but not surprising.

[Jacksonx3]

1 hour ago, PeteMoss said:

Politifact's analysis is opinion, not based on facts.

Ok, there are dozens of similar ratings.  How about this from conservative publication The Dispatch https://thedispatch.com/p/the-lawsuit-against-gateway-pundit

[Common Sense]

5 hours ago, The West Sider said:

Here is the problem with what you and I read. People tend to gravitate to what confirms their beliefs. When you read ANYTHING, you must always consider the bias of said source and why they are writing what they are writing. Take nothing at face value. If you’ve ever watched Scott Adams (from Dilbert) he always talks about the art of persuasion. Think.

Remember, with print circulation being down it’s harder to make money/revenue. The more sensational the headline, the more likely you will click, the more money they make.

You'd be better off resisting the temptation to be sidetracked on the thread topic by a useless troll who, unable to defend his/her positions, resorts instead to questioning the sources for the information others share. It's the oldest trick in the book for the poorly educated who, in the absence of knowledge or any real interest in debating an issue, pathetically flail away at where the information comes from. There's nothing to be gained by attempting to reason with the unreasonable who delight in their willful ignorance. You, West Sider, seem to have a level head and are able to look at all sides of an issue. Other posters' sole reason for coming here is to deflect attention away from the actual substance, because they know if they tried to defend their beliefs, they would confirm the suspicions others have about their lack of honesty, credibility and knowledge.

[PeteMoss]

5 hours ago, Jacksonx3 said:

Ok, there are dozens of similar ratings.  How about this from conservative publication The Dispatch https://thedispatch.com/p/the-lawsuit-against-gateway-pundit

Think for yourself.  GO and read the Gateway Pundit and then do your own research. 

 

[Common Sense]

11 minutes ago, PeteMoss said:

Think for yourself.  GO and read the Gateway Pundit and then do your own research. 

 

Why bother, Pete? The troll isn't interested in exploring the information that's been presented. Only here to swerve the conversation away from the information and get people focused on the sources. Absolutely useless to encourage someone like that to open their mind, because it erroneously assumes they HAVE a mind to open.

[Jacksonx3]

6 hours ago, PeteMoss said:

Think for yourself.  GO and read the Gateway Pundit and then do your own research. 

 

Evaluating the validity of sources and discarding invalid sources is a key component of research.  That’s why science uses peer review - to ensure that proper methods were used in the research process.  Reviewing incorrect or misleading source information isn’t research - it actually makes the reader vulnerable to incorporating the falsehoods into their knowledge base EVEN IF THEY INITIALLY RECOGNIZE IT AS FALSE.  This is how propaganda works - the lie is repeated often enough that the listener eventually says “oh yeah, I’ve heard that” dropping the “but I knew it was wrong” part.  There’s actually a TON of research that’s been done on this aspect of human memory.  So, based on my research, disregarding bogus sources IS thinking for oneself. 

[PeteMoss]

3 hours ago, Jacksonx3 said:

Evaluating the validity of sources and discarding invalid sources is a key component of research.  That’s why science uses peer review - to ensure that proper methods were used in the research process.  Reviewing incorrect or misleading source information isn’t research - it actually makes the reader vulnerable to incorporating the falsehoods into their knowledge base EVEN IF THEY INITIALLY RECOGNIZE IT AS FALSE.  This is how propaganda works - the lie is repeated often enough that the listener eventually says “oh yeah, I’ve heard that” dropping the “but I knew it was wrong” part.  There’s actually a TON of research that’s been done on this aspect of human memory.  So, based on my research, disregarding bogus sources IS thinking for oneself. 

Spare me your "intellectual" posts.  You believe what you need to believe to sleep at night.

[Common Sense]

50 minutes ago, PeteMoss said:

Spare me your "intellectual" posts.  You believe what you need to believe to sleep at night.

Well done Pete. Ordinarily when you slap a troll they go away. This one apparently enjoys being slapped.

[Common Sense]

Here's another great read on the subject. Maybe someone can pass it along to the "reporters", "anchors" and talk show hosts in the region who seem to believe it's their patriotic duty to tell only the government and big pharma's side of the story.
https://nypost.com/2021/12/21/omicron-coverage-reveals-how-the-establishment-media-keep-us-scared/#

[The West Sider]

Here is another thing that I find peculiar in a splitting hairs kind of way.

Differentiating between people who died ‘from’ COVID as opposed to dying ‘with’ COVID. To me, it doesn’t really matter. A life lost is a life lost. If COVID was a contributing factor that lead to someone dying they essentially died from COVID (as they most likely would have not died at that point in time unless they had had COVID.) 

As for the car accident victim who happened to have COVID (that I know people will bring up). If they were classified as having died from COVID, if this is indeed true at all, it would be an incredibly small number I’d imagine.

[The West Sider]

Duplicate post. My apologies.

Edited December 22, 2021 by The West Sider
Duplicate post. My apologies.

[The West Sider]

20 minutes ago, Common Sense said:

Here's another great read on the subject. Maybe someone can pass it along to the "reporters", "anchors" and talk show hosts in the region who seem to believe it's their patriotic duty to tell only the government and big pharma's side of the story.
https://nypost.com/2021/12/21/omicron-coverage-reveals-how-the-establishment-media-keep-us-scared/#

Totally agree. The media, instead of being a watchdog, is now a lapdog. Remember, a lot of this is to generate revenue as traditional circulation has dropped considerably.