Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Cnn recently published you cannot tell the sex of an infant at birth.

I rest my case.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/30/polit...oem/index.html

Stock

Post a video of that quote, please. Please.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

I chose the flat earth analogy quite deliberately. It's something which (hopefully) seems absurd, as I assume that everyone here "knows" that the earth is round, and recognizes that there are some people who are convinced that the earth is flat, and views them as fools. Meanwhile, those people who are convinced that the earth is flat views everyone who does not agree (which, hopefully, is literally every single person reading this) as sheep, or non-woke, or part of the conspiracy, or some other synonym.

Because every contentious issue is like that.

The only meaningful distinction is where one's own beliefs lie on the opinion curve. If it's a contested issue, then your own belief tends to seem naturally and obviously correct, and those with opposing viewpoints must therefore be defective in some way in their thought process.

And, from their point of view, the reverse is also true.


Recognizing this disparity is important to understanding any contentious issue. Or, more importantly, understanding the contention surrounding the issue.

Bajingo

Joe, the earth is flat and you personally are incapable of proving otherwise, and even less capable of convincing others.

Also everyone else here are bots and I am quite literally the center of the observable universe.

Skamba

Of all the dumb conspiracy theories, the moon landing hoax must be one of the dumbest. There's so much third party evidence that there really should be no dispute.

rleete

iTrader: (21)

The best thing I ever read about the moon landings being a hoax goes something like this:

Yes, the moon landings were a hoax, Stanley Kubrick was hired to make the most convincing films to document them.

However, being a stickler for accuracy, Kubrick insisted that the movie be filmed on location.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

CNN had Dr. Leana Wen on their programming last night. I rest my case.

Trust the leftist science.

poormxdad

It’s easy to come up with a conspiracy theory since we no longer believe most of what we see. I know, deep down, that something is wrong.

CDC Director Rochelle Walensky announces that new data suggests vaccinated and recovered people do not carry Covid-19.

My theory is globally, the powers that be want this Covid thing to be over now. They can’t just say they were kidding, or it’s really not as bad as they thought. Instead, they’re going to tell everyone that you can’t get or give the virus once you get vaccinated. They’ll force the non-believers like myself into getting the jab by tying it to being able to go to work, or go to restaurants, or whatever. Then, when a large percentage of the population is vaccinated, Covid will just end.

Back in 1985 the Coca-Cola Company introduced New Coke. It tasted like Pepsi. We were told it was a complete failure. I even read that in a textbook when I was getting my Master’s. It’s a lie.

In 1985, the price of sugar was going through the roof. Coke was looking to cut costs, but they did not want to change the formula. They knew that no matter how perfectly they matched the flavor of the original, loyal consumers would be outraged and claim they could taste the difference. They made enough New Coke to flood the shelves for three or four months as I remember it. By that time, they believed all the original Coke was gone. Then they did a mea culpa, and introduced Classic Coke. Why didn’t they just bring back the original? They had to change every can, bottle, bottle cap, carton, fountain handle, machine graphic, etc. They created Classic Coke because they replaced sugar with high-fructose corn syrup. You can see it on the can. They didn’t change the formula of the original, rather they replaced it with something that tasted exactly like it. Consumers wanted their “Coke” back, and welcomed Classic Coke with open arms. I’d say millions of people were fooled.

We get fooled all the time.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

This is one of the most reviewed case studies in Marketing/Advertising courses.

During sampling, the gave taster-testers small sips of a few various formulas, each with more sugar/sweetener than the last. When tasting in this fashion, everyone preferred the crazy-sweet taste of the original formula; so much so they went to market with it.

The problem has everything to do with taste-testing methodology and the way the were giving out samples vs. how a coke drinker would normal swig a drink. Once consumers bought a can of New Coke and started drinking it normally, as opposed to just a small sip, it was very disagreeable.

the end.

But, yes, everything was moving to corn-syrup at the time, but the failure of New Coke was on the marketing department.

poormxdad

I completely disagree. That's what they want us to believe. They never had any intention of marketing "New Coke". Essentially, Classic Coke IS New Coke.

Bajingo

Either way coke is gross

poormxdad

I'm consuming an RC Cola as I type this. Not as sweet as Coke. Reminds me of Jolt Cola.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

And that's part of the problem.

Cherry-pick one fact, and frame it in such a way that it seems to support your argument. Then claim that it is final, indisputable, irrevocable proof ("rest my case") and you no longer have to entertain contrary notions.

Going back to a story I told a few pages ago, about my trip with the family to the Creation Museum. This is essentially the same argument which I saw on display over and over again. Evolution? Biology? Cosmology? The diversity of global languages? The diversity of global ethnicity? Well, here's what God has to say about it (as we interpret the textual codification of a thousand years' worth of oral tradition and storytelling from across a number of different cultures, some of which claim to hold an accounting of a time before the universe existed, and / or after the destruction of the earth), and that's the final word. Anyone who questions this is wrong, because God.


It's very self-referential. How do we know that what's written in this book is true? Well, because it's written right here in this book.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Here's a video from yesterday of Buttigeigegeg leaving his armored SUV a few blocks form the White House and getting on a bike to appear like he biked his way to work:


The fact that he's only biking 3 blocks [while being followed by an SUV] and not the full 3 miles to his his office, and simply doing it for brownie points and the photo-op, has no negative effects on his sycophants -- in fact it's working very well judging by the positive comments i see.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

I would argue that wearing a mask to prevent COVID-19 would be up there.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

I rest my case:

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

How much you wanna bet the driver was a(n) [ethnicity, gender], and now everyone's gonna [action]?

Bajingo

Still applys.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

They were scheduled to be removed, and just like the 6th, they had to manufacturer crime in order to justify their continued existence.


But a Tesla would not have done this because it's not an assault vehicle.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

oh, case and point is it?