Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Ove Interest?
Date: 15 Feb 2025 14:49:47 GMT
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <m1bnsbFl7s3U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <kl2rqjhtclsfcouku8s511rrr9o0ddm9s8@4ax.com>
 <vol2bc$2uqgd$1@dont-email.me>
 <vonsp7$3hmi0$9@dont-email.me>
 <vonuj5$3htuk$3@dont-email.me>
 <vop413$3ojl2$4@dont-email.me>
 <voq66s$1vl7$2@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net A5NObVgrbRcOZvQvCi2dFQD5gvVux9/ewxhwTUGS4+60wm2Z+2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fy2wgi8UBI2s8MeFGQBcqbN+R64= sha1:pnlADbj3ywr7fxS6DQkuuwJyoT0= sha256:UWh5JiOvJOVGzlExZe/MN0GBIn8KEUp9PwAQMzReUb4=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Bytes: 4319

AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> On 2/14/2025 10:09 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 2/14/2025 12:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 2/14/2025 10:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 2/13/2025 10:15 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 2/13/2025 12:04 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> I wonder whether the below is of interest to anyone?
>>>>>> https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2022/5/25/how- 
>>>>>> alternative-facts- threaten-us-democracy
>>>>>> It seems to provide a very sad state for the U.S. 
>>>>>> political system.
>>>>> 
>>>>> pffffft.
>>>>> Peruse any 'fact check' site to see how the most slanted 
>>>>> bias prefers to call itself 'fair and objective'.
>>>> 
>>>> Examples? And examples of their bias?
>>>> 
>>>> Did Trump really get millions more votes than Biden in 2020?
>>>> 
>>>> Are most glaciers worldwide not really shrinking?
>>>> 
>>>> Did COVID treatments really kill more people than the 
>>>> disease did?
>>>> 
>>>> ISTM that most people who complain about common fact 
>>>> checking outlets really mean "My beliefs conflict with 
>>>> their facts."
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> This is not a new problem. And should surprise no one.
>>> 
>>> https://www.allsides.com/blog/6-ways-fact-checkers-are-biased
>> Ah. Well, that's one opinion piece. Is it accurate? How 
>> should we check? Shall we go down that rabbit hole?
>> 
>> I'll agree there is bias across the political - and probably 
>> every other - spectrum. But as usual, I think it's foolish 
>> to point to one or several incidences of failure and use 
>> that, as some do, to condemn an entire system.
>> 
>> You, Andrew, have a tendency to do that with laws, with 
>> implications that because a certain law is not 100% obeyed 
>> or enforced, that laws are worthless. (I'm aware that you're 
>> careful not to say that outright, but only by implication.)
>> 
>> Our tricycle rider has a strong tendency to do that with any 
>> information source other than his own imagination. He 
>> proudly says or implies that no outside sources can be 
>> trusted, and that he alone can tell what facts are real and 
>> true.
>> 
>> Again, bias exists. But there are actual truths, and not 
>> every opinion is correct. On most issues, it should be 
>> possible to do sufficient tests, or research, to determine 
>> what is true and what is not. The hardest part is finding 
>> people who will agree that their own biases are mistaken.
>> 
>> To finish with a compliment, you're one of the few people 
>> here who has admitted from time to time that you were wrong.
>> 
> 
> How about some low hanging fruit?  The Official Policy 
> Statement, which was enforced by censorship and 
> manipulation, was that the mRNA jab would prevent 
> contraction of the Wuhan virus and block contagion as well 
> (those constituting the definition of a vaccine).  Neither 
> is actually true.
> 
> The interested reader might peruse the record of 'fact 
> check' statements on that. Other examples abound.
> 

Was that said officially in the US? Certainly even with Boris who well does
like an mis truth or two! They talked about flattening the curve ie keeping
folks out of hospital which the vaccines will reduce the probability, but
also with lockdowns to slow infection down as the vaccine will not stop
that, thats why lockdowns where needed to prevent intensive care being
overwhelmed.

Roger Merriman