[PUG] How do you fight propaganda?

[Billy]

Erase this thread it embarrasses you.

 

[Satya]

As far as I am concerned you have no credibility anymore. Good day.

I have no credibility because I question your tendency to emotionally bring issues from one thread into another?

Erase this thread it embarrasses you.

How so? I strangely feel very little embarrassment. I guess I'm not as enlightened as you.

 

[Billy]

I have no credibility because I question your tendency to emotionally bring issues from one thread into another?



How so? I strangely feel very little embarrassment. I guess I'm not as enlightened as you.

No because you talk a lot of BS and then weasel away when it comes time for you to man up and stand by your word.

 

[Satya]

No because you talk a lot of BS and then weasel away when it comes time for you to man up and stand by your word.

And this charge has what relevance to the topic of how to fight propaganda?

 

[Billy]

And this charge has what relevance to the topic of how to fight propaganda?

Well for one you wish to fight propaganda, I assume you mean to do that by using facts as you ALWAYS try to do when you want to debate rationally, you only say it alllllll the time. And when the opportunity arrives for you to do as such, you simply dismiss as propaganda (your sworn enemy) and slink off. Ergo this thread is embarrassing you.

I was counting on you to be the counterbalance to the video of Lord Monckton, I was expecting pages of epic linking and screed of you going post by post over his points debunking them, that you didn't even choose to watch the video leaves me feeling cheated and upset, it leaves a poor taste in my mouth like sucking on a greasy quarter.

 

[Satya]

Well for one you wish to fight propaganda, I assume you mean to do that by using facts as you ALWAYS try to do when you want to debate rationally, you only say it alllllll the time. And when the opportunity arrives for you to do as such, you simply dismiss as propaganda (your sworn enemy) and slink off. Ergo this thread is embarrassing you.

Oooook. And I'm guessing you are citing the thread where I kindly asked you to present studies for us to review for accuracy and you then demanded that I leave as the example of my dismissiveness and cowardice.

 

[Satya]

I was counting on you to be the counterbalance to the video of Lord Monckton, I was expecting pages of epic linking and screed of you going post by post over his points debunking them, that you didn't even choose to watch the video leaves me feeling cheated and upset, it leaves a poor taste in my mouth like sucking on a greasy quarter.

Whether or not I watch the video has little relevance to whether the sources it uses to support its position actually do support its position. In fact, if the sources are indeed valid, then I never need to watch the video to determine for myself from the sources alone that there is validity to the position.

 

[Billy]

Oooook. And I'm guessing you are citing the thread where I kindly asked you to present studies for us to review for accuracy and you then demanded that I leave as the example of my dismissiveness and cowardice.

The study was shown in the form of a video with its own cites. You decided you didn't feel it was worth debunking them. You are a hypocrite. I demanded that you leave when you decided not to participate in a proper manner. You yourself constantly harp on being logical, rational and using sources and cites, you were given as such, and you hid behind "dismissiveness". Hence you were told to leave. *IF* you want to reenter the discussion I will anxiously await your points of contention backed by scientific study, feel free to use a video if you want that addresses the research shown.

 

[Billy]

Whether or not I watch the video has little relevance to whether the sources it uses to support its position actually do support its position. In fact, if the sources are indeed valid, then I never need to watch the video to determine for myself from the sources alone that there is validity to the position.

They are valid, both the claims and the sources. He tells exactly where he got the sources from, including using many from the IPCC (your sides sources). Feel free to debunk the claims with sources of your own, or admit that Global warming (which ended in 1995 FACT) is not a threat to the world and that mankind is not responsible for it.

 

[Satya]

The study was shown in the form of a video with its own cites. You decided you didn't feel it was worth debunking them. You are a hypocrite.

To the contrary. I kindly offered to go through every cited study with you to determine what those studies actually indicate and whether they support the position.

I demanded that you leave when you decided not to participate in a proper manner. You yourself constantly harp on being logical, rational and using sources and cites, you were given as such, and you hid behind "dismissiveness". Hence you were told to leave. *IF* you want to reenter the discussion I will anxiously await your points of contention backed by scientific study, feel free to use a video if you want that addresses the research shown.

I have no interest in the video. It alleges a certain position and I'm more interested in the studies behind that position. If you would like to provide them, and prove that you can critically analyze sources along with me, then it would be worth my time.

 

[Billy]

To the contrary. I kindly offered to go through every cited study with you to determine what those studies actually indicate and whether they support the position.



I have no interest in the video. It alleges a certain position and I'm more interested in the studies behind that position. If you would like to provide them, and prove that you can critically analyze sources along with me, then it would be worth my time.

Interestingly the guy in the video even say, I am not here to speak rhetoric or a side, I am here to speak science and boring science. He goes through scientific study one after another. You might have known if you had looked at the video, you didn't because you know you are wrong and you are simply a partisan. You are finished, good day.

 

[Satya]

They are valid, both the claims and the sources. He tells exactly where he got the sources from, including using many from the IPCC (your sides sources). Feel free to debunk the claims with sources of your own, or admit that Global warming (which ended in 1995 FACT) is not a threat to the world and that mankind is not responsible for it.

So because someone simply tells you where they got sources, that automatically means they have portrayed the results accurately? Why do you believe that is? Because you, like most people, are eagerly hopping at the opportunity to go through the cited research yourself? Do you even have access to the research? Do you really think that propagandists don't expect people like yourself to be too lazy to go through the research?

 

[Satya]

Interestingly the guy in the video even say, I am not here to speak rhetoric or a side, I am here to speak science and boring science. He goes through scientific study one after another. You might have known if you had looked at the video, you didn't because you know you are wrong and you are simply a partisan. You are finished, good day.

I'm a partisan because I want to see the actual research behind the video rather than his interpretation of it?

Interesting that critical thinking is now considered partisan.

 

[enfp can be shy]

I honestly have no idea. I've watched too many scenes, both here in America and overseas, where propaganda has been effectively used to sway voters to make clearly unreasonable decisions. Education isn't the answer, because education nowadays is propaganda. Clearly truth can't win against propaganda because I've watched honest, fact based campaigns being utterly trashed by appeals to fear and distortion. What can you do?

So your main question is how to influence people without making propaganda of your own. Well, you can't. You use your own propaganda. Kav said it. And that's how the world is suddenly full to the top with nothing but propaganda.

The honest method would be to just work to make the truth more visible, without influencing people directly. But long gone are the times when that worked. Now everybody is under some kind of influence, and they will be warned to expect your fair attempt to present the objective truth, which they'll think covers something else etc. Propaganda is more powerful on all levels of society.

The only enemy of propaganda is creativity, because true novelty comes outside of the circles of stagnation. However, creativity was long ago almost entirely imprisoned, and is being simulated within the propaganda. So it gets tougher and tougher. There are a couple of generations already who rarely get to even sense what true creativity is supposed to be, they have forgotten about it.