Politics CHARLIE KIRK SHOT IN UTAH

takes two and you didn't meet me half way. You made it personal. You twisted my words. You claimed i said things i did not say. That is not open and honest dialogue.
So ill move on to those who can exert that type of behavior. Not cater to deflection and twisting of comments snd personal attacks, which is what you did from the outset.
Your effort to try to understand others is not there its you are right and if one disagrees with you they are harmful. This is not open and honest dialogue.

I gave it and didn't get it in return, so I'm moving on.
But you are welcome for the thanks you provided.
Unfortunately i cant thank you in return because you did not provide that same type of conversation.
I do find it interesting, those claiming one side cant have open honest dialogue, exhibits that same behavior themselves.

We are doomed…..

 

Again, bullshit. I said some scientists CAN have agendas.
So basically, you are twisting my words. Thats bullshit….

devil is on the details and you glossed right over them, like so many people do….

 

Typical, and it just goes to show the true color of some of these posters.

 

So you can't do it. That's fine.

 

Purely a hate crime by an immature young man who has never voted..just a reaction to the Charlie Kirk msg that caused him to snap. This will undoubtedly stifle some hard right wing hate speech mongers from taking it public. It also reflects the horrible possibilities that can happen when your govt doesn't hold it's most corrupt and divisive talking heads accountable. Trump and Bannon and Alex Jones are still out there slinging partisan hatred to the weak willed. Trump and now Kirk have been shot over it less than a year into the MAGA presidency. Guns aren't protecting us...sorry. It's not working.

 

that is NOT what i said….

 

Looney left - blows up army recruiting station
Looney right - blows up abortion clinics

Crazies on both ends

I still have Loonies frommy travels in Canada

 

My claim was that you can't have open and honest dialogue with someone who doesn't respect and trust academia and science.

You proceeded to argue with me about how untrustworthy academia and science are.

I'm not sure what else you wanted.

 

You always like to say a lot but when you reply like this, just goes to show you “check mate”

you only want to push your thoughts and views and claim this and that, basketball related and this topic related, you always have a big problem when someone doesn’t see things the same way as you.

It’s ok man, people can have different views and form their own judgement, sorry that bothers you so much.

 

I asked you to participate in the conversation by supporting your claim. You refuse to do so.

It's not checkmate, I'm just not sure where else to go with it.

 

To his point, and kind of the same point as yours... follow the money. Thats all he was saying, which is the truth. Absolutely scientists said it didn't work, but who are they bought by? Working for?

Same if they said that all of it did work for covid? Were they paid by Pfizer? Etc.

In a roundabout way y'all are talking about the same thing (at least big picture, I didnt read fully in the semantical part, so I apologize if this has been uttered).

 

That is your incorrect perception based on your biased views of me.
I wanted nothing. I stated a belief. You took it to a personal level and claim to be providing open and honest dialogue. You broke that down from the beginning.
I never said science cant be trusted or science had agendas. I said some scientists CAN have agendas.
You take that however you want but it wont be open and honest dialogue…

 

You stated twice that scientists have agendas. Why are you arguing you did not? That doesn't seem in good faith.

 

In my opinion scientific method cannot function within the constraints of fundementalist religious belief...that's where science is divided. Demonstrable science require proof of a supreme being and heaven or hell. An actual scientist cannot accept these beliefs blindly without proof. We have many diverse ideologies masking as "science" driven that are actually dogmatically driven. Some may define a UFO as an angel and some as an alien interstellar being.

 

Ill push back slightly. I fully believe in the scientific method. It does not mean all scientists bind to it. in favor of disingenuous results. Both of those statements, unfortunately in our political and capitalistic climate, can be true.

That being said, that shit needs to be cleaned up because science is the only way we have even gotten as far as we have. And right now its very diluted.

 

I'm just gonna go ahead and bump this. We don't have the full facts or know if the persons total motives, but looking more and more true that any sane reasonable person needs to wait to review the facts before full blown rage.

 

Then you can take offense to teachers teaching religious curriculum. If you don't think some teachers have agendas, then you are just as naive as those who think Trump can do no wrong…

But also taking offense at all? Why? Why take offense?I didn't attack you personally. Get the emotions out of it.
Thats a big part of society problems. Reaction with emotion instead of rational thoughts.
If you told me some project managers in construction can be selfish pricks out for nothing but money, i wouldn't take offense, id agree because its true.

 

I'm sorry if you feel I've personally attacked you in some way. That was not my intention.