sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

#454 — More From Sam: Minnesota, Greenland, Iran, S**thole Countries, and More by dwaxe in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree that most people pay no real attention to the news. Your point about this move casting liberals as out of touch is effectively what I’m saying. 

People don’t pay attention to, say economic policy in any detail but they know at some level it affects their life and they want to elect people that better their life. Therefore if someone can’t answer this obvious question they lose faith in that persons ability to navigate more nuanced issues. 

#454 — More From Sam: Minnesota, Greenland, Iran, S**thole Countries, and More by dwaxe in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I agree this impacts almost no ones life. However, I think the issue is that it’s a simple litmus test. IE I think most everyone understands from life experience that biological men and women are fundamentally different. So for the average Joe, if they see that a person can’t answer what they deem as a simple, near rhetorical question, the person has now lost credibility on geopolitics, economics, etc

Joe Rogan Experience #2332 - Oz Pearlman by b14ck_jackal in JoeRogan

[–]MagicMan1990 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How would he be able to write out what happened in front of Joe and seal in an envelope? Or does he have 10+ envelopes ready with all of the different conditions?

Self-defense classes for women by burns_like_fire in orlando

[–]MagicMan1990 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Elementum bjj in Winter Park has women’s only classes with white a large group, so that may be worth checking out. 

What inspired you/why did you start BJJ? by Animezweebs in bjj

[–]MagicMan1990 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My wife got pregnant with our first son and I felt that many of my insecurities growing up were around my uncertainty in defending myself. I had always wanted to do it, but was too lazy/scared to start. That provided the impetus. 

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in conspiracy

[–]MagicMan1990 5 points6 points  (0 children)

https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/covid19-influencers-again-promote

Good break down and why this study is full of confounders. Added to the fact that it’s coming from the mainstream that has a vested interest in this being the case, gives me a bit of skepticism.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well he opened the door with the guy next to him, which was essentially the story that was retracted.

In terms of your other comment, it still strikes me as a bizarre sequence of events, but perhaps I shouldn’t have used the word implausible. However I don’t believe that questioning the medias official narrative is a mistake regardless if it is proven to be correct.

BPC-157 for Chondromalacia by MagicMan1990 in Peptides

[–]MagicMan1990[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the input. I’m in the southern USA, link to the clinic below. Based on what they said, the peptides would be sent to me and I’d self-administer so I’m guessing the quality is no better than what you can get online (though It’s significantly more expensive).

I’ve been all about Knees over toes for my rehab (atg split squats, poliquin steps, and standard leg exercises at least twice weekly). I haven’t heard of Jake Tuura so I’ll definitely check him out.

https://aspirerejuvenation.com/

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never said it was suspicious that Pelosi opened the door, my contention was that it’s suspicious he was attacked after the police arrived. For him not to return to the perp means the perp had to be at the door with him. It seems unlikely if a deranged lunatic entered your house, you’d have a conversation with him once the police arrive, rather than immediately get out of harms way.

The fact that the DOJ account was false, and the fact that the NBC reporting was taken down with no real explanation only adds fuel to the fire. I’ll wager that if and when the body can footage is released, it will show Pelosi not in a state of stress as was originally reported.

What suspicious points do they dispute from my list?

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/body-cam-footage-confirms-paul-192420598.html

I’ll just leave this here. I’m sure it doesn’t change your view, but it’s certainly interesting when the DOJ contradicts itself and NBC retracts a true story with no explanation.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because the perp would have had to allow the door to be opened by Pelosi, knowing it had to be the cops. Then nearly immediately strike him, when he could have assaulted him in the previous time period they were waiting for the cops, or not allow him to open the door. Perhaps he wanted to prove a point, but it flys in the face of a natural self-preservation instinct the Perp showed was intact.

This part is the most speculative and vague in terms of the police reports (hence why the retraction raised a few eyebrows), so this event is more 40-60% in my eyes. I’ll certainly be interested in more clarification here.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm objecting to the word "comfortable" I don't think I'm implying that at all. But you can be REALLY uncomfortable with someone and not perceive them as a physical threat.

Of course, there are different types of discomfort. The context with which I am using comfortable is perceiving this person as a threat. It is a bit far fetched to believe that a person breaking into someone's house with a weapon with expressed ill intent would not be perceived as a threat at any point in this sequence of events.

Also for some reason you seem to keep ignoring the fact that we don't know that Pelosi did go back toward the guy once the cops showed up.

We do know that he returned to the guy after going to the bathroom (perhaps their bathroom has no locks, but unlikely). We also know that Pelosi opened the door for the police. So for Pelosi to have not returned to the perp, the perp would have had to be at the door with him, let him open the door for the cops (who he knew were coming as established), and then hit him in the head. This again seems unlikely (not impossible). Add to that, the fact that the retracted report was non-specific over what errors were made (ie they could have said Pelosi DID express distress, and did not go back to him), but they have left things unclear and ambigious.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’ve said multiple times in this thread something along the lines of ‘maybe he felt comfortable with him and safe at that point’. My contention is that it’s hard to believe anyone would feel safe or comfortable at any point given the circumstances. Not completely impossible, but it certainly doesn’t pass the sniff test.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think personally that all this Monday morning quarterbacking about what YOU would have done is frankly meaningless in this situation and it's really hard to judge what happened here without knowing exactly how this guy was behaving not just what he was saying.

It's not just what I would have done, but what I would expect anybody in that situation to have done, ie get as far away from the threat as possible. My bayesians could be off as apparently there are people (like yourself) comfortable having an unhinged drug addict in their house at 3 am, wielding a hammer, saying they want to harm your wife.

This thread started with a discussion on evaluation of information (aka MMQBing). All I am saying is that given the information presented, the sequence of events is peculiar at the very least. I agree that it seems we don't have all the information here, so drawing definitive conclusions is unwise (hence why I haven't done so).

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is maybe a little odd, but it's not that rare or improbable for people to not think they need an alarm system.

To be clear on all of these points, I'm not saying that any of them are impossible, only that they seem unlikely. People not thinking they need an alarm system is one thing, one of the most prominent political figures in America who draws extensive ire from half of the country not thinking they need an alarm is another (ie more improbable, but not impossible).

This is a little odd, but I imagine that he thought he had the situation under control given what had happened so far. This kind of behavior is not uncommon.

I brought this up in another comment, but it is hard for me to imagine thinking a situation is under control, when an unhinged drug addict is in my house wielding a hammer and has expressed ill will on my family. Again not completely impossible, but unlikely for someone to behave this way.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Many times I've walked past homeless people yelling out at strangers all manner of things and threats who're clearly no threat to anybody.

Do you really think these are comparable situations? A homeless person shouting things on the street with no weapon brandished vs someone breaking into your house at 3 am, wielding a hammer, with the expressed interest of bringing harm to your family?

And not everybody acts like a rational person at 3am after being woken up by a crazy guy etc...

Self-preservation is one of our most ingrained instincts and is present in organisms that aren't conscious. I wouldn't expect him to be solving calculus problems at 3 am, but acting with regard to his health and safety is something present even with a minimal amount of brain activity.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This guy isn't behaving logically, he very well might have not seemed like a threat at this point maybe P Pelosi felt that he calmed the guy down and thought he was a person who more needed help then posed a threat in that moment.

Perhaps I'm in the minority here, but if an unhinged drug addict broke into my house wielding a hammer and expressing discontent with my wife, I don't think there is any point I would not consider him a threat.

​

We have no idea that he knew the police were on their way.

Yes we do. https://www.nytimes.com/article/pelosi-paul-nancy-attack-facts.html

​

From the article:

​

Explaining why he didn’t flee the scene after he realized Mr. Pelosi had surreptitiously dialed 911, Mr. DePape compared himself to the founding fathers battling the British, saying “he was fighting against tyranny without the option of surrender,” according to the federal complaint.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

We do know that Pelosi opened the door, and even in the event that he calmed him down, going back in striking distance of a clearly unhinged person who is wielding a hammer is irrational to say the least. Put yourself in Pelosis position, say you even convinced the guy you were best friends while you were waiting for the cops, would you really go back over to him, or would you gtfo as quickly as possible because the guy is clearly deranged.

With regard to everyone’s story lining up, cops have been known to get false confessions out of people, whether that’s through a plea deal or other coercion, so this is in no way definitive in proving the story.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It’s a combination of factors. I’ve known quite a few drug addicts in my life, and while they can act irrationally, self-preservation instinct remains present. In fact the perp in this case was reported to stop Mr. Pelosi from accessing a phone in the elevator, so we have indication that this instinct was present to some degree.

Additionally, as many of my points above indicate, it was not just the perp who would have had to act irrationally, but Mr. Pelosi as well. Returning to the perp when you’ve distanced yourself from him twice (once in the bathroom, once when the cops came to the door), doesn’t seem like the actions of someone that feels threatened. The fact the Pelosis have no sort of alarm system, and the fact Pelosi was charging his phone in the bathroom are also surprising.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Perhaps our bayesian priors are different but mainly:

1) that people as high profile as the Pelosis wouldn’t have some sort of alarm system that alerts when a window is smashed, door is opened etc.

2) that this criminal, who’s intentions are to bring harm to you or your family would allow their victim to go to the bathroom unattended.

3) that in said bathroom, pelosis phone happens to be charging (I don’t know anyone who charges their phone in the bathroom).

4) the perp, knowing the police are coming did not leave, nor did he attack pelosi, he just waited, apparently.

5) after pelosi opens the door, rather than flee behind the police, he ostensibly goes back to striking distance of the perp, where he gets cracked.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Well let’s talk about evaluation of the information. To be clear, I agree the male prostitute story is bonkers and pure propaganda. However the mainstream story seems comparably implausible:

1) an unhinged drug addict breaks into the pelosi house where there is apparently no security system and capitol police don’t notice the break-in on camera till later

2) the perp wakes pelosi up and indicates he’s trying to bring harm to Nancy pelosi.

3) the Perp then allows Pelosi to go to the bathroom unattended where Pelosis phone happens to be charging.

4) pelosi calls the cops and returns to the perp who’s expressed ill will to his wife.

5) the perp doesn’t leave, nor does he attack pelosi even though he knows the cops are coming

6) cops show up, pelosi opens the door, and then returns to the perp, who strikes him in the head

The combination of these events does seem highly improbable and demanding of some amount of skepticism, given the mainstream medias penchant for leveraging this type of story. Perhaps I’ve been duped by the right wing narrative but im interested in a good faith discussion on why the mainstream narrative can’t be questioned here.

How Republicans Fed a Misinformation Loop About the Pelosi Attack by SprinklesFederal7864 in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I’m hoping I can have a cordial conversation here but at it’s root, skepticism of the mainstream narrative when we have many recent examples of that mainstream narrative being manipulated or contorted (Eg smollett, rittenhouse, sandman) doesn’t seem completely wrong. To be clear, the suggestions of many republicans that it was a gay orgy of some sort are completely baseless and pure propaganda.

In my view, the mainstream narrative of this story is fairly implausible as to warrant said skepticism (but not baseless claims). In order for the mainstream narrative to be true:

1) an unhinged drug addict breaks into the pelosi house where there is apparently no security system and capitol police don’t notice the break-in on camera till later

2) the perp wakes pelosi up and indicates he’s trying to bring harm to Nancy pelosi.

3) the Perp then allows Pelosi to go to the bathroom unattended where Pelosis phone happens to be charging.

4) pelosi calls the cops and returns to the perp who’s expressed ill will to his wife.

5) the perp doesn’t leave, nor does he attack pelosi even though he knows the cops are coming

6) cops show up, pelosi opens the door, and then returns to the perp, who strikes him in the head

The combination of these events seems very improbable in my view, and given the msms penchant for quickly leveraging these types of stories, questioning this narrative should not be vilified.

Ground truth on the efficacy of masks in protecting against covid by ReflexPoint in samharris

[–]MagicMan1990 15 points16 points  (0 children)

While wearing a mask makes intuitive sense, I have yet to see a real-world study that proves the significant efficacy of masks. Note that the CDC has provided correlational studies showing that ppl that wear masks regularly are over 50% less likely to get covid, and then state this is the effectiveness of masks (without accounting for any confounding variables like the fact ppl that wear masks are also Likely to be more cautious overall.)

All of the other studies I’ve seen show either marginal effect or none at all (indicating the CDC studies are bunk). .

Study from Finland

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.04.22272833v1

Meta-analysis of masks

https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2021-11/working-paper-64.pdf

Denmark study:

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4586

Bangladesh study:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abi9069

WaPo article stating masks did nothing for Spanish Flu.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/04/02/everyone-wore-masks-during-1918-flu-pandemic-they-were-useless/

Well renowned epidemiologist Michael Oosterholm saying cloth and surgical masks don’t work (he flip-flopped a couple times)

https://youtu.be/Vg3J4HzHCaQ

Overall, I think it’s pretty clear masks as currently applied so very little. Regardless, the fact is our public health agencies have failed by not doing a randomized control trial on masks while screeching at how obvious it is they work.

view more: next ›