Evacuating the Gaza Strip

  • News
  • Thread starter misskitty
  • Start date
  • #276
loseyourname
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,749
5
The Smoking Man said:
That is also why the defence is allowed to gather evidence and have teams of 'experts' debunk the evidence presented by the prosecution.
Of course. The main point being that this is pretty much what we do here. I'd venture to guess that almost no one posting in the Politics subforum is interested in conducting an investigation. They're interested in conducting debates, where they gather evidence to support the opinions they already hold.

Edit: By the way, I'll never forget OJ. That stupid Bronco chase interrupted the NBA finals.
 
  • #277
loseyourname said:
Edit: By the way, I'll never forget OJ. That stupid Bronco chase interrupted the NBA finals.
The Chinese feel your pain.
 
  • #278
loseyourname said:
Of course. The main point being that this is pretty much what we do here. I'd venture to guess that almost no one posting in the Politics subforum is interested in conducting an investigation. They're interested in conducting debates, where they gather evidence to support the opinions they already hold.
The difference here, as I have seen it, has to do with credibility of sources and refusals to examine things posted on 'suspect sites'.

I have seen comments statin that ... Oh, that is a left wing site and I refuse to even go there.'

At the time that happened, I followed that link and found an AFP article that had been preserved by that site that had 'scrolled off the regular news systems'.

And so, the debate had gone like this ...

A: 'I maintain that XXXX is true.'
B: 'I don't believe you. Prove it'
A: 'Look here [link].'
B: 'I won't look there because it is a leftist site.'​

That is the difference between 'investigation in the real world' and here.
 
  • #279
356
3
Ah the mystical differences between the real world and internet subculture....
 
  • #280
loseyourname said:
Edit: By the way, I'll never forget OJ. That stupid Bronco chase interrupted the NBA finals.
Ironically, I have the same memory of the Kennedy Funeral.

I flicked on the TV to watch my children's shows at the time and there were all these images of a car moving slowly along a parade route.

And, in those days we could only get two channels.
 
  • #281
kat
26
0
The Smoking Man said:
The difference here, as I have seen it, has to do with credibility of sources and refusals to examine things posted on 'suspect sites'.

I have seen comments statin that ... Oh, that is a left wing site and I refuse to even go there.'

At the time that happened, I followed that link and found an AFP article that had been preserved by that site that had 'scrolled off the regular news systems'.

And so, the debate had gone like this ...

A: 'I maintain that XXXX is true.'
B: 'I don't believe you. Prove it'
A: 'Look here [link].'
B: 'I won't look there because it is a leftist site.'​

That is the difference between 'investigation in the real world' and here.
I want to take a moment to clarify something. I had made a comment on some thread somewhere in regards to.....erm something. The link was to commondreams.com, I believe. I stated that I would not click through to that site. I won't...because I refuse to click through to it and increase it's hit ratings. I've found it..to be an unreliable site. Also, there's been some issues raised by the AP and Reuters in regards to sites posting their reports on their sites and changing the contents of reports. So, it's no longer adequate to link to a site that says it's report came via this or that source. Of course..this ignores the fact that mainstream media is often erroneous as well..*Shrug*
 
  • #282
vanesch
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
5,028
16
loseyourname said:
Of course. The main point being that this is pretty much what we do here. I'd venture to guess that almost no one posting in the Politics subforum is interested in conducting an investigation.
The Politics subforum is (at least to me) the smoky bar of PF, where you chat with others about improving the world, after a few drinks. Sometimes it is a bit serious, most of the time it is half serious and sometimes it is lunatic.
:approve: Nevertheless, in doing so, you learn stuff. Also a great exercise in rethoric :biggrin:
 
  • #283
alexandra
Smurf said:
:rofl: Perfect example how perception is everything.
I have not read the whole thread yet (but am carefully working my way through it - wow, it's long!). But some things people have pointed out so far regarding the allocation of 'guilt' for the Holocaust reminded me of the Social Psychology experiments exploring this very issue that were conducted after WWII by Solomon Ash ( http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/s/so/solomon_asch.htm [Broken] )and Stanley Milgrim (http://www.muskingum.edu/~psych/psycweb/history/milgram.htm#Theory ).

These experiments basically support the hypothesis that it is what Stanford professor Philip Zimbardo calls 'the power of the situation' (or the pressure to conform/listen to authority) that shapes social reality and influences people's behaviour - and that can (to some extent) explain how an 'entire nation' can be complicit in the violences done in Nazi Germany.

I don't think these social psychology theories adequately by themselves explain the complexity of the situation prevailing in Europe from before WW1 to after WWII (one needs also to look at the economics and politics of the time, and the imperialist rivalries between the major nation players). These theories do, however, offer some sort of psychological explanation for the actions of individuals involved and swept up in the course of historical events they felt they had no control over.

If any of you click on the above links and find them interesting (I found the outcomes of the experiments absolutely fascinating), you may also be interested in exploring Zimbardo's 'Prison Experiment' website: http://www.prisonexp.org/

alex
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #284
356
3
kat said:
I want to take a moment to clarify something. I had made a comment on some thread somewhere in regards to.....erm something. The link was to commondreams.com, I believe. I stated that I would not click through to that site. I won't...because I refuse to click through to it and increase it's hit ratings. I've found it..to be an unreliable site. Also, there's been some issues raised by the AP and Reuters in regards to sites posting their reports on their sites and changing the contents of reports. So, it's no longer adequate to link to a site that says it's report came via this or that source. Of course..this ignores the fact that mainstream media is often erroneous as well..*Shrug*
Well you've got all your base's covered then don't ya. Yup, no lefty sites for you (or any site at all that disagrees with you)
 
  • #285
221
0
vanesch said:
The Politics subforum is (at least to me) the smoky bar of PF, where you chat with others about improving the world, after a few drinks.
Yes...drink comrade, drink.

http://img335.imageshack.us/img335/9940/frontlable7ro.jpg [Broken]

http://img311.imageshack.us/img311/2294/leninaide5jn.jpg [Broken]

I here by nominate leninaide as the official drink of the United PhysicsForums Socialist Party.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #286
vanesch
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
5,028
16
Townsend said:
Yes...drink comrade, drink.

http://img335.imageshack.us/img335/9940/frontlable7ro.jpg [Broken]

http://img311.imageshack.us/img311/2294/leninaide5jn.jpg [Broken]

I here by nominate leninaide as the official drink of the United PhysicsForums Socialist Party.
Haha, funny pictures :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #287
kat
26
0
Smurf said:
Well you've got all your base's covered then don't ya. Yup, no lefty sites for you (or any site at all that disagrees with you)
I realize that it might be difficult for you to grasp the difference between a site that "disagrees" and a site that is "unreliable"...but maybe you could give it a try...hmm? :yuck:
 
  • #288
60
0
kat said:
I realize that it might be difficult for you to grasp the difference between a site that "disagrees" and a site that is "unreliable"...but maybe you could give it a try...hmm? :yuck:
I think you mean commondreams.org

So what is it that makes it unreliable?
 

Related Threads on Evacuating the Gaza Strip

  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • Last Post
22
Replies
531
Views
58K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
79
Views
9K
  • Last Post
6
Replies
126
Views
13K
  • Last Post
6
Replies
128
Views
17K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
77
Views
6K
Top