Objection
@Objection@lemmy.ml
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 1 day ago:
I mixed up the threads, which wouldn’t have happened if you hadn’t followed me around dragging it out into another thread in a desperate attempt to weasel out of providing the evidence that you don’t have because it doesn’t exist.
Evidence or GTFO.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 1 day ago:
Witch, tankie, sealion, fascist, it doesn’t matter the label, the tactics employed are the exact same.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 1 day ago:
lol this thread is off the rails and should probably get modded
Yes, it should be. I was trying to shitpost in peace when PJ comes here trying to start shit with me to distract from another conversation in order to weasel out of providing any evidence.
offered evidence of some (supposedly controversial) event.
Lol no he did not. Not even a shred. On principle, even.
See, I’m accused of being a witch, and by asking for proof that any witchcraft actually happened I’m questioning the Inquisition and proving my guilt.
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
How will I ever recover?
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
I did a wrongthink 😔
I’m so sorry. There are, in fact, three lights. I will never trust my own eyes ever again, I pledge to always follow whatever the group decides is correct and never again to think for myself or question what I’m told. I hearby renounce all standards of evidence and uphold the in-group’s symbolic beliefs as the highest authority of epistemology. Will you ever forgive me?
…still on the shitpost comm, yeah?
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
You’re still trying to get me into a debate, lol. You’re still hurling accusations with no basis in reality. Because you will neither provide evidence, nor will you GTFO.
Evidence, or GTFO.
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
Bro you come into this thread, guns blazing, attacking me and trying to get me into a debate, I tell you to leave me alone, and somehow I’m the one demanding you “debate me?” No, please, do not debate me. Please leave me alone. But if you are going to follow me around, all I ask is one simple thing:
Evidence or GTFO.
That’s it. If you’re going to hurl accusations at me, then provide evidence that the things you’re attacking me for denying are actually grounded in reality.
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
Evidence or GTFO.
Do you deny the “white genocide,” yes or no?
Evidence or GTFO.
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
Evidence or GTFO.
That comic is not an excuse for rejecting the entire concept of evidence lmao.
Evidence or GTFO.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
Evidence or GTFO.
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
Do you deny the ongoing US genocide of Italians? Yes or no. Do you deny the “white genocide?” Yes or no.
Evidence or GTFO.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
No, I want you to provide evidence that the genocide you claim to exist actually exists. That’s all I want from you and from now on it’s the only thing I’ll say to you.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
How many posts is that with you providing zero evidence? I should start keeping a tally. You’re probably up to like a hundred with me alone.
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
Bruh that’s literally you in the comic. Stop following me around. I’m trying to eat breakfast.
Dumbass really thought “sealioning” meant, “asking for evidence, in any context” 😭😭😭
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
Fuck off, fascist genocide supporter.
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
What the fuck are you talking about. Stop following me around to other threads.
If you like talking to me so much, finish our other conversation by providing the evidence I asked. I’m not discussing anything else with you until then.
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
The deal to end the shutdown. Imo the Dems caved, getting very little in exchange.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
See, you only ever tell me to fuck off when you’re backed into a corner where the only other option would be to actually provide evidence. You fucking love engaging with me, you’ll argue any point, all day long, it’s only when you’re pressed for evidence and can’t weasel out of it that you suddenly lose interest in the conversation. Or, as Sarte would say,
“If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
What the fuck are you even talking about. Stop following me around to other threads.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
Hey, it’s the witch trial logic again! I’m a “fascist” because I don’t believe claims without evidence, and therefore, I don’t deserve to see your evidence. Which you totally, definitely have, right there, you just can’t post it, because you could only post it if I said it was true, in which case you wouldn’t post it because it wouldn’t be necessary.
Meanwhile, I assume that by completely ignoring my question on whether you condemn the US genocide of Italians, that means you support it. Why do you want to kill all Italians, fascist scum? You ought to be deplatformed from every community for this.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
Really? Could you please link to this reliable evidence of genocide that I’ve never seen, that was supposedly presented to me? I’d be thrilled to finally see it, so I can finally renounce all my tankie ways and admit that I was wrong.
Let me guess, this “evidence” all traced back to Adrian Zenz, the same way it has every single time one of you types it into Google and posts whatever articles sound like they support your conclusions without reading past the headline.
- Comment on Um, actually, Neville Chamberlain didn't "cave" to Hitler, he actually got a lot out of the deal. 2 days ago:
This is a shitpost, satirizing recent events in the US.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
Of course that’s me. I have not seen reliable evidence that a genocide is or was happening there. As I recall from a previous conversation, your rather silly stance on that was that you don’t have to provide evidence to support a claim of genocide, on the basis that I’m a fascist, which you concluded from the fact that I deny your baseless claims of genocide. A classic, textbook case of circular logic.
I said that I don’t support any genocide. I don’t believe that anybody should start genociding Uighurs. I do deny genocides, such as the supposed “white genocide” that fascists go on about, or any other claims of genocide that aren’t supported by evidence. In fact, I deny pretty much any claim that isn’t supported by evidence. Apparently, your position is that if some random person tries to tell me that France is genociding Belgians, I’m supposed to accept that claim without question or else I’m a fascist, unworthy of the privilege of getting to see your evidence.
Which brings me back to the question I posed on the linked post: Do you condemn the ongoing US genocide of Italians? Are you, or are you not, a genocide denier? Simple question, really. If you accept that it’s happening, then there’s no need to provide evidence, if you deny, you’re a fascist and I won’t provide you evidence because fascists don’t deserve evidence, or something like that. Sorry, I’m not really as good at doing the whole witch trial thing as you are.
- Submitted 2 days ago to [deleted] | 45 comments
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
But pro-genocide bootlickers like you revel in the deaths of minorities, if only it’s done by the fascists wearing the right team colors
Looked in a mirror lately?
I don’t support any genocide, the way you do.
- Comment on What the democrats just did. 2 days ago:
Funny that you didn’t post the parts immediately before and after that snippet. Before:
A YouGov survey released Friday found 32 percent of respondents blame Democrats for the shutdown, while 35 percent fault Republicans and 28 percent say both parties are equally responsible.
After:
But over the past month, net approval for how parties are handling the shutdown has worsened for both President Trump (-21 to -27) and congressional Republicans (-23 to -27). Net approval for congressional Democrats has stayed low but mostly unchanged (-25 to -26) since October, according to YouGov.
You’re just hyper-focusing on the part that you find rhetorically convenient. More people still blamed the Republicans and support for the Republicans’s handling of the shutdown was falling faster.
A shutdown, furthermore, that most voters were against to begin with.
Lmao did you just provide more evidence to undermine your own position?
Who would you blame more if there is a shutdown of the federal government at the end of the month, the Democrats in Congress, Donald Trump and the Republicans in Congress or both equally? Or have you not heard enough to say?
Democrats in Congress 19%
Donald Trump and the Republicans in Congress 26%
Grow a spine.
- Comment on Hrmmmmm 2 days ago:
So then, what renains to be the difference between “state run” and “church run” benefits really?
What kind of question is that? Churches are funded through donations rather than through taxes and they have no legal obligation to perform charity, so the difference is that they are not as reliable for people in need.
- Comment on Y'all seem to have lost track of the correct response to people crying about dead baddies 1 week ago:
So uhh any thoughts on those Powerball numbers?
- Comment on Why isn't the rest of the world doing anything about the USA? 1 week ago:
They respect other nations sovereignty
Uhhhhhhh???
- Comment on YSK that risks to exposure of nuclear radition are often over exaggerated by considering a Linear No Threshold (LNT), which does not match with many studies. 1 week ago:
Jesus Christ I’m so tired of this shit. “What if climate change is actually good because you can grow food in colder climates? Then we wouldn’t have to change anything, which I really don’t want to anyway.” “What if masks actually make you more likely to contract COVID? Then I wouldn’t have to wear one, which I really don’t want to anyway.” And now, “What if exposing yourself to radiation is actually good for you?”
This is absolute nonsense. The Wikipedia article is full of "[unreliable source?"] and “highly controversial,” and the video starts out with stuff like, “Actually, all the experts agree with me, they’re just afraid of speaking up,” which instantly destroyed any willingness to suspend my disbelief on this nonsense.
Yes, there is a tiny amount of radiation in a banana that isn’t enough to cause harm. But that has absolutely nothing to do with nuclear reactors. The difference between “harmless” and “extremely lethal” with radiation can change drastically depending on factors like distance, in ways that are not intuitive to most people. Treating radioactive material and radiation produced by a reactor with extreme caution is the best practice regardless, because if things go wrong, they can go very, very wrong. You cannot mishandle a banana in such a way that it destroys a city, which is a something I never thought I would have to explain.
Furthermore, your dismissal of other forms of green energy is outdated, it may have been true 20-30 years ago but the technology has advanced and will keep advancing and with the massive upfront cost of reactors it doesn’t usually make sense to build new ones (although keeping existing ones running is often reasonable imo).