Suddenly, we have “universities” claiming to be the only ones in pursuit of the truth.
Then…THE DEEP RIFTS. Oh, this is delicious. The phrenologists and the anti-vaxxers are battling it out on Twitter.
hate to see this fracture in the rationalist community between the rationalists who believe in race science and vaccines and the rationalists who believe in race science but not vaccines 😔 pic.twitter.com/DdaKfjKOeS
— evo psych googling (@evopsychgoogle) November 10, 2021
There’s more.
i'm dying pic.twitter.com/jsWEfKwCXo
— Nayanika (@philbio7) November 10, 2021
Screw all those guys, every one of them.
Prosecutors are asking for 4 years for the Qanon shaman. Fingers crossed that they get it.
It’s like watching flerths and young Earthers in an argument. It’s like a Mayan calendar fanatic and a JW arguing when the world will end. What a beautiful disgrace.
This has all the makings of a train wreck, except that I am strangely not compelled to keep watching.
[insert “Let_them_fight.gif” here.]
The bad guy here is a crackpot named Bret Weinstein, who I never heard of before. He is the guy that resigned from Evergreen U. in Washington state over a dispute about racism.
Bret Weinstein is a Plague Rat.
This is a supposedly trained scientist that can’t even read the scientific literature.
He is operating at the level of a high school student who was homeschooled by fundie xians.
evo psych googling (@evopsychgoogle) @ OP:
Which definition of “race science” is the tweeter using?
The supporters of “scientific” racism, such as Murray and Hernstein (Bell Curve)?
Or people examining racism, e.g., Derrick Bell of “Critical Race Theory fame.?
Not that I’m all that surprised. Unfortunately, the folks who tout their “rationality” the loudest usually turn out to be the ones who are claiming that their crackpot ideas are the most rational ones around.
— Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
(Let’s not seek truth, but declare it in advance and cherry-pick evidence in support” (Sound familar?)
This makes me wonder what a debate between a “fake moon landing” believer and a “Nazis had moon bases” advocate would look like.
Surely one person can’t hold both those beliefs…
@7 Don’t bet on it.
davidc1 @ #8 “@7 Don’t bet on it.” I would say the same thing. I can even imagine their illogic: the US moon landings were fake because the US didn’t have the technical capability that Germany had. The US had some German rocket engineers (Wernher von Braun) but not the guys who engineered getting to the Moon and building the Moon bases. It’s easy to make up shit.
It would seem more appropriate to describe these self-proclaimed “rationalists” as “rationalizationists”, since it appears their only use for reason is to defend their biases.
OT
Qanon kook Clay Clark is shoehorning the shooting at the film set into a narrative about how this was a murder to protect the Clintons or whatever.
“The Scathing Atheist 456” has the details.
Ironically, recently a study of an off-the-shelf drug (many syllables, see medical Xpress if you want the name) could reduce hospitalization and death from 16% of the test subjects to 11% – there were 1500 people in the study, so it is robust.
I bet the mutoids are not going to talk about this medicine, because that is a medicine the librul commie authorities approve of.
Re. The Q anon kook -he is confusing two different people named Sussman, and cooking up a tale of how Epstein was trying to create a race of demonic superhumans with economic backing from Bill Gates.
We’ve finally solved the mystery of why the world seems to be turning to fascism and disorder. It’s those supergenius Nazis on the moon who have developed a self-sustaining colony and concocted a fascist ray that’s been beaming back to earth for the past ten years or so.
Notice how Sam doesn’t castigate Bret for dangerous irrationality, or attack him the way he attacked Greenwald on Secular Talk. He continues to talk to someone in his club. But he doesn’t understand why people say he is playing identity politics.