Flaming Pie
Well-Known Member
You mean, think like you.
Water in Flint and other general problems in our political environ
- Thread starter Dr. Who
- Start date
Blunted 4 lyfe
Well-Known Member
And made a whole lot worse when President Obama signed TPP into law, you know it's an American job killer when only members of congress got to see the details but were sworn to secrecy, no recordings nothing, nada.
B4L
Elwood Diggler
Well-Known Member
yes it did.
snyder/emergency mgr Earley made the switch on the water source. no question.
the deq (they work for snyder)and the epa are both worthless
the fix? require the deq to do their fucking job. clean house
the epa..............same as the deq
either way you slice it, the blame score is snyder and his administration 2, epa 1.
snyder/emergency mgr Earley made the switch on the water source. no question.
the deq (they work for snyder)and the epa are both worthless
the fix? require the deq to do their fucking job. clean house
the epa..............same as the deq
either way you slice it, the blame score is snyder and his administration 2, epa 1.
red w. blue
Well-Known Member
Did you cherry pick this?This Just In.... @Rob Roy sighted in Detroit...member of KKK, tells everybody they are slaves...hides from subpeona
red w. blue
Well-Known Member
You picked so many cherries flaming pie could bake a cherry pie.
Flaming Pie
Well-Known Member
Sweet cherry pie! Oh yeah!
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Did you read it? What were your conclusions.
Do you even understand what cherry picking data is? I don't think you do. Citing an article, posting a headline and pasting key points in the article is not cherry picking data. Can you explain what cherry picking data means? If you can't, just ask and I'll do explain it to you.
red w. blue
Well-Known Member
Would you like to show me an article, headline or pasting of key points in a article posted by you that were not used by you to make your point?
That's cherry picking!
In a debate cherry picking is what is done to support your side. Its normal and is a given in debate.
Most news outlets cherry pick for a left wing slant and don't report on what they can get away with not reporting. This is bad as most only get a slanted or one sided take on what is going on in the world.
Fox cherry picking is what IS left out of the lame stream media. But their fair and balanced.
Last edited:
Elwood Diggler
Well-Known Member
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
nope, your description (I highlighted it) is not cherry picking. What is not cherry picking and what I try to do is select pertinent data to support an argument. This is a completely valid debate tactic. What I try not to do is quote out of context, use anecdotal evidence as if it proved anything or select data to support an argument while hiding the rest. I'm not perfect at this. You on the other hand just ramble on without much information to support what you say.
Read this: http://scienceornot.net/2012/04/03/devious-deception-in-displaying-data-cherry-picking/
At the risk of being accused of cherry picking, I'm going to copy and paste a section in italic font that helps me make my point. Read the whole article and maybe you will understand why posting a link and quoting an article is not the same as cherry picking data or being dishonest as NLX has said of me a few times.
How to recognize this tactic
In cherry-picking, people use legitimate evidence, but not all of the evidence. They select segments of evidence that appear to support their argument and hide or ignore the rest of the evidence which tends to refute it.
Variations and related tactics
Quoting out of context , or quote mining, is a type of cherry picking. In this tactic, a spoken or written passage is lifted out of its surrounding text in a misleading way.
Use of anecdotal evidence is a form of cherry picking. Anecdotes are usually unrepresentative of the overall situation.
Closely related to cherry picking are attentional bias (noticing only that evidence that seems relevant), confirmation bias (noticing only that evidence that confirms existing beliefs) and anchoring bias (giving undue importance to one piece of evidence and ignoring other evidence).
red w. blue
Well-Known Member
How dumb can you get. Cherry picking came from you claiming gun owners did it and all the wile you had doing the same, as I pointed out.
HERE YOU JUST CHERRY PICKED MY POST! you highlighted only part of my cherry picking in a debate.
Then you tried say what I said, but say its not cherry picking? Its what you did call cherry picking when YOU brought it up in the first place? Cherry picking is cherry picking, but it is only called when its used wrongly.
Do you mean like you just did to my post?
If your point was to prove yourself wrong in your of calling gun owners cherry pickers, You did. If it was to show yourself cherry picking and taking what I said out of context, well then you have made your point VERY WELL!
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Your reading comprehension is practically zero. Do everybody a favor including me and put us all on ignore. That way you will only see what you comprehend.
red w. blue
Well-Known Member
I have not ever put someone on ignore nor will I ever, by everybody I take it to mean unclebuck, Rrog and your other supercilious buddys. I am like VI who said "I came for the info and stayed for the debate". I miss VI, med and DD.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Man, I was making a point that you don't seem to be able to comprehend when reading. About the only person you understand is yourself. Anybody that you disagree with you just hector. You seem pissed about my saying wingnuts cherry pick data and rely on lobbyists to tell them what to say and that your vague questions are unanswerable. You don't understand what cherry picking data is even though the description was practically handed to you on a platter then act as though somehow its my problem.
I do put people on ignore. Not people that I disagree with -- boring people, the ones that go on and on about off topic stuff. The most recent was somebody that knew nothing, disagreed on principle and expected people to carry them when they couldn't look up facts that were easy to find then started coming back simply to complain. Actually, the people that I get the most valued interactions from are those that I disagree with. But they can at least read, understand and discuss a specific topic.
Now, how about that scintillating off topic issue you keep bringing up, cherry picking data to make a point. I've tried to explain the difference between using data or information to support an argument and cherry picking data to obfuscate and win a point. But it went completely over your head. Do you want to continue to entertain everybody with that? Do you want to continue to entertain everybody by hectoring me? If so, bring it. I'd rather you didn't but I'm not going away just because you are being a jerk.
But I will say you are not boring.
Last edited:
since1991
Well-Known Member
Watching the debates....i cant believe the Koch Brothers and other GOP big money elites want to privatize the VA. What the fuk is wrong with these people? Republicans are truly strange. Beyond strange....thier absolutely frikin crazy. No one i know and probably you know has ANYTHING truly in common with these fuks. Why do working people all across this nation (and poor white folks of all things) keep voting for these people is beyind me. GOP true agenda is not that well hidden. And yet they get votes.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Some people like @Flaming Pie love to vote against their very own interest. So blinded because of party affiliation causes them to make decisions that actually hurts them and family.
and also because of...stupid
londonfog
Well-Known Member
nope it is not going to happen with Bernie and he getting killed in this debate.