Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 12131415 LastLast
Results 326 to 350 of 351
  1. #326
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    9,911
    https://www.economist.com/graphic-de...ireddailychart

    Trump’s attacks on the media has backfired. Trust in mainstream American newspapers has grown, even among conservatives. Meanwhile trust in two media outlets that offer the president reliably fawning coverage, Fox News and Breitbart, has withered

    Sad. Loser.

  2. #327
    off the back
    Reputation: rufus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    I'll bet you're sure of lots of things.
    Not really. that one I'll bet on Care to wager?
    Eff the King's Guard. Eff the city. Eff the King.

  3. #328
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by rufus View Post
    Not really. that one I'll bet on Care to wager?
    Sure. As I said, it's all about the odds.

    Given that it's likely 10 billion have died, you'll need to put $10 billion to my $1. As the man said, 'show me the money.'

  4. #329
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Fredrico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    24,341
    Quote Originally Posted by xxl View Post
    Why not?? You're really asking why someone doesn't get to claim their POV is axiomatic truth until disproven??

    Because it's a logical fallacy to do so.

    (Cf. https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/fallacies_list.html)

    That has nothing to do with me, whatever "speculations" real or imagined you ascribe to me, I have heard the man out (which is why I called him on it), and posters can still engage in such fallacious faux-reasoning (just as long as they realize they may well be called on it), so you can skip the crap about shutting out anyone, Fredrico.
    Ok man. It's a deal!

    And yes, you did call him on it after reading his post.

  5. #330
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Fredrico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    24,341
    Quote Originally Posted by rufus View Post
    WTF does that even mean?

    Anyway, you said nothing's 100% certain. I just proved you're wrong.
    You left out taxes, rufus!

  6. #331
    xxl
    xxl is offline
    Moderator
    Reputation: xxl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    32,289
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    Let's examine that line of reasoning.

    First, there is no such thing as immutable 'truth'. The best we can hope to say is that the sky is blue today and there is a high degree of probability it will be blue tomorrow. Gravity exists today and there is a high probability it will be operative tomorrow.

    Everything is speculative but we live as we must, assuming, based on the near past, the near future will operate in the same way.

    This is a fundamental that I thought every modern person understood. There is no 100% certainty.

    So when you say you don't entertain "speculation" the fact is you do it all the time.

    The question really is, 'what degree of certainty do you require to accept speculation as the likely reality'.

    I can't answer that for you but you need to determine, for yourself, just where you draw the line.

    But to say you don't accept speculative appraisals is simply untrue.
    You've misread my posts, and misunderstood; this is what I said about entertaining speculations:

    "Not interested in your speculations, sorry"

    Note the possessive. I'm not interested in your speculations (in this thread, anyhow) because you purport that your speculations be given the bias of being treated as though they were factual, regardless of any support for same. It's a logically-flawed approach.
    More Americans wanted Hillary Clinton to be President than wanted Donald Trump.

    Donald Trump has never had a wife he didn't cheat on.

  7. #332
    off the back
    Reputation: rufus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Fredrico View Post
    You left out taxes, rufus!
    That's not certain, as the Republicans are doing their very best to make sure that some people don't have to pay them.

    I am still 100% certain he will die someday.
    Eff the King's Guard. Eff the city. Eff the King.

  8. #333
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by xxl View Post
    You've misread my posts, and misunderstood; this is what I said about entertaining speculations:

    "Not interested in your speculations, sorry"

    Note the possessive. I'm not interested in your speculations (in this thread, anyhow) because you purport that your speculations be given the bias of being treated as though they were factual, regardless of any support for same. It's a logically-flawed approach.
    So if I speculate the sky is blue or gravity keeps us earthbound, you won't treat that as factual. As I tried to convey, factual always has a measure of speculation.

    So in order to evaluate my 'speculations' don't you need to ascertain the likelihood of their being an accurate representation of reality?

    To dismiss them out of hand you would need to have an alternate theory.

    In the example I gave above, you choose to deny my speculation the sky is blue, as you give no credence to my speculations.

    What color do you think the sky is?

    Your line of reasoning, frankly, isn't very useful. If Trump says his inauguration crowd is the largest ever, photographic evidence shows it was not. Thus the likelihood his 'speculation' is accurate is very low.

    However, when he says he could shoot someone and his base would not leave him, his speculation, based on current polling of his base, shows a probability his statement accurately reflects reality.

    See how that works?

  9. #334
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by rufus View Post
    That's not certain, as the Republicans are doing their very best to make sure that some people don't have to pay them.

    I am still 100% certain he will die someday.
    What odds are you willing to give? Put up or shut up. Given the number who have died and only 2 claim to have come back, (Jesus and Lazarus), I look forward to your putting up $billions against my $1.

    So as I said, If you are so sure, show me the money!

  10. #335
    off the back
    Reputation: rufus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    13,154
    Now you're just being a friggin' idiot.

    Tell you what, I'll put my $10 million up against your $10 million, that you're gonna die.
    Eff the King's Guard. Eff the city. Eff the King.

  11. #336
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by rufus View Post
    Now you're just being a friggin' idiot.

    Tell you what, I'll put my $10 million up against your $10 million, that you're gonna die.
    How are you not banned for name calling?

    Oh, never mind.

    So you think the odds are 50-50 I'll live forever and you say I'm the idiot?

    Sorry, think some more.

  12. #337
    off the back
    Reputation: rufus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    How are you not banned for name calling?

    Oh, never mind.

    So you think the odds are 50-50 I'll live forever and you say I'm the idiot?

    Sorry, think some more.
    We're not dealing with odds. You're the one who mad the claim "nothing is 100% certain".

    I proved you wrong. What, you don't have enough faith in your statement, so brilliant as you assume yourself to be, that you don't dare back it up with a little wager?
    Eff the King's Guard. Eff the city. Eff the King.

  13. #338
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: DaveWC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,863
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    So you think the odds are 50-50 I'll live forever and you say I'm the idiot?
    No. If you take the bet, you think the odds are 50-50. He's simply offering a bet, skewing the odds in his favor.

    Personally I think you died a year ago & you wrote these posts before your death having given your executor instructions to bleed them out onto the net day by day.

  14. #339
    off the back
    Reputation: rufus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    13,154
    No, the bet is, is his death 100% certain, or not? That's 50-50 in my book.

    It's not about the billions that have died before him, this is solely about him. He seems to think nothing's certain, therefore, he's got a chance. I'm taking the side that he says is an impossible bet. He should be giving me odds.
    Eff the King's Guard. Eff the city. Eff the King.

  15. #340
    xxl
    xxl is offline
    Moderator
    Reputation: xxl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    32,289
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    So if I speculate the sky is blue or gravity keeps us earthbound, you won't treat that as factual. As I tried to convey, factual always has a measure of speculation.

    So in order to evaluate my 'speculations' don't you need to ascertain the likelihood of their being an accurate representation of reality?

    To dismiss them out of hand you would need to have an alternate theory.

    In the example I gave above, you choose to deny my speculation the sky is blue, as you give no credence to my speculations.

    What color do you think the sky is?

    Your line of reasoning, frankly, isn't very useful. If Trump says his inauguration crowd is the largest ever, photographic evidence shows it was not. Thus the likelihood his 'speculation' is accurate is very low.

    However, when he says he could shoot someone and his base would not leave him, his speculation, based on current polling of his base, shows a probability his statement accurately reflects reality.

    See how that works?
    No, jimb100; those "speculations" you're equating to your own here are, unlike yours here, backed by independent research, and have long since passed into being considered factual by nearly everyone. This false equivalency is but one reason why it'd be illogical to afford one person's speculations to dictate what we'd all call fact.

    That's how that works.

    Also, one doesn't need an alternative theory to discount another one as wrong, since falsification rather than alternative explanation is all that's needed to discount a theory.
    More Americans wanted Hillary Clinton to be President than wanted Donald Trump.

    Donald Trump has never had a wife he didn't cheat on.

  16. #341
    xxl
    xxl is offline
    Moderator
    Reputation: xxl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    32,289
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    How are you not banned for name calling?

    Oh, never mind.

    So you think the odds are 50-50 I'll live forever and you say I'm the idiot?

    Sorry, think some more.
    Because it's a troll party thread. What else is this thread about, except good virtual friends, getting together, and trolling each other for sport?

    Like doing the dozens, only for internet bike nerds.

    (Plus, I'm going to speculate that the other mods, and maybe the admins, are off racing, and don't have time to babysit everyone).
    More Americans wanted Hillary Clinton to be President than wanted Donald Trump.

    Donald Trump has never had a wife he didn't cheat on.

  17. #342
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by xxl View Post
    No, jimb100; those "speculations" you're equating to your own here are, unlike yours here, backed by independent research, and have long since passed into being considered factual by nearly everyone. This false equivalency is but one reason why it'd be illogical to afford one person's speculations to dictate what we'd all call fact.

    That's how that works.

    Also, one doesn't need an alternative theory to discount another one as wrong, since falsification rather than alternative explanation is all that's needed to discount a theory.
    Are you just willfully ignoring the point?

    These widely accepted speculations still do not reach 100%.

    And the point that remains is that everything is speculation, it simply depends on the percentage likelihood of reflecting reality, now.

    The usefulness is in comparing competing speculations and supporting each one to determine which is likelier to reflect reality.

    You don't choose to play the game. Well, that's OK, no one says you must. But when you choose to ignore one person's speculations without actually providing alternative possibilities with zero evidence that either is more likely, then you are simply saying that you don't like my proposal because, well, you just don't like it.

    As the night follows the day.

  18. #343
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by rufus View Post
    No, the bet is, is his death 100% certain, or not? That's 50-50 in my book.

    It's not about the billions that have died before him, this is solely about him. He seems to think nothing's certain, therefore, he's got a chance. I'm taking the side that he says is an impossible bet. He should be giving me odds.
    So now what you're saying is that the certainty (100%) of my death is a 50-50 possibility.

    And you make fun of Trump supporters for tying themselves in knots trying to defend him?

    And you don't see yourself doing the same thing here?

  19. #344
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by xxl View Post
    Because it's a troll party thread. What else is this thread about, except good virtual friends, getting together, and trolling each other for sport?

    Like doing the dozens, only for internet bike nerds.

    (Plus, I'm going to speculate that the other mods, and maybe the admins, are off racing, and don't have time to babysit everyone).
    So it's open season on name calling?

    I completely understand. A one way street. As many have long suspected.

  20. #345
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by rufus View Post
    We're not dealing with odds. You're the one who mad the claim "nothing is 100% certain".

    I proved you wrong. What, you don't have enough faith in your statement, so brilliant as you assume yourself to be, that you don't dare back it up with a little wager?
    Based on your recent posts, logic is not your strong suit.

    I will refrain from embarrassing you further.

  21. #346
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveWC View Post
    No. If you take the bet, you think the odds are 50-50. He's simply offering a bet, skewing the odds in his favor.

    Personally I think you died a year ago & you wrote these posts before your death having given your executor instructions to bleed them out onto the net day by day.
    Let's reflect a moment on your speculation.

    Since I respond on a daily basis to specific threads, your speculation has very low odds of being true. So low, that you must be either lying or unable to logically deduce a higher probability of reflecting reality.

    Either way, its not a good look.

  22. #347
    off the back
    Reputation: rufus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    So now what you're saying is that the certainty (100%) of my death is a 50-50 possibility.

    And you make fun of Trump supporters for tying themselves in knots trying to defend him?

    And you don't see yourself doing the same thing here?
    No. The question is the 50-50 possibility, yes, or no. . I'm fully on the yes side. The side you say is impossible. So it should be a safe bet for you.

    You're not half as brilliant as you seem to think you are.
    Eff the King's Guard. Eff the city. Eff the King.

  23. #348
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,298
    Quote Originally Posted by rufus View Post
    No. The question is the 50-50 possibility, yes, or no. . I'm fully on the yes side. The side you say is impossible. So it should be a safe bet for you.

    You're not half as brilliant as you seem to think you are.
    OK, I'll give it one more try.

    You are now saying its a 50-50 proposition. Even money I might die then again I might not.

    100% sure means that it is guaranteed to happen.

    Even if you could see the future, it would be hard to be 100% certain that a thing that hasn't happened, will happen.

    Odds are mathematical expressions of probability.

    Will the earth turn enough for the sun to rise tomorrow?

    Based on everything we know about astrophysics, the likelihood, probability, odds, whatever you want to call it might be 99.99999%. Why not 100%? Well, there might be a god and he might decide to turn the lights off.

    See, the point is, no one knows for sure.

    So the point is that for any proposition, there is some likelihood it could happen.

    Physicists speculate (admit the possibility) that you could walk through a solid wall. It might take trillions of attempts, but physics doesn't preclude the possibility. So the odds may be 1 in a trillion, it's still not 100% guaranteed not to happen.

    I hope this helps your understanding of certainty, odds, speculations and probabilities.

    Further, I don't claimed to be brilliant, only a bit well read.

    You could appear to be brilliant too, but gaining understanding will not serve you in good stead here.

  24. #349
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    9,911
    Meanwhile, Trump's Alt-Wrong groupies had a small get together today



  25. #350
    xxl
    xxl is offline
    Moderator
    Reputation: xxl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    32,289
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    Are you just willfully ignoring the point?....

    No.

    It's that your point is to demand of others the assumption that your POV is to be assumed as correct-until-proven-otherwise, a huge logical fallacy, for reasons I explained to you.
    More Americans wanted Hillary Clinton to be President than wanted Donald Trump.

    Donald Trump has never had a wife he didn't cheat on.

Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 12131415 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The original tea party vs. the TEA party
    By Fredke in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 09-27-2010, 12:37 PM
  2. Replies: 70
    Last Post: 09-01-2008, 02:51 PM
  3. The Republican Party: The Party Devoid of Ethics.
    By spyderman in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: 08-05-2006, 08:06 AM
  4. Party at Spin's! Party at Spin's barn!
    By OES in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 12-11-2005, 06:43 PM
  5. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 02-16-2005, 01:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

roadbikereview.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.