Does fact checking matter to your opinions?

[connda]

45 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Fact check, is USA the land of free? 

It depends on your definition of "free" and "freedom," especially as more so-called "free" countries are rolling into totalitarianism. 
And what's one of the first things a totalitarian regime accomplish?
They outlaw all views except the established, status-quo, orthodoxy of the state.  There are plenty of examples of that happening in the 20th Century, and now again is so-called "free" countries.

Example:  legislation happening is some Western countries where speech may be deemed "legal" but that speech will be censored because it may possibly offend someone. 

From the word I grew up in:
"Sticks and stones may break my bones but name will never hurt me."

We had thicker skin back when I was a kid.

[Red Forever]

The fact that US and UK have recently elected such outrageous liars as Trump and Blobby Johnson shows the absolute need to fact check.

[xylophone]

7 minutes ago, Tropposurfer said:

yeah I'm totally WOKE;

I believe in people being who they chose to be, for women to have the right to decide what they do with their own bodies, that history should be taught as it happened (no matter how unpleasant that factual timeline is) not censored to make WOKE white people feel happier,  that we are all of one race, that gay people are people just like me, that fighting for the freedom of all is fundamental to mine and the entire human races existence, that racism is a vile cancer on the entire planet just to name a few of my woke beliefs and lived attitudes.

You see i am secure enough in myself to not be bothered or threatened buy any of the above. What I am threatened by is people who hide their evil, violent, hateful intents behind the tropes of anti-wokism and through tjheir oh-so obvious pure, unadulterated paranoid, neurotic projection claim to be championing humanity.

I have never really thought about it so I don't know quite where I sit in this "world", however for what it's worth: –

I do believe that women should have the right to choose what happens to their bodies, and that history should be taught as it happened, because changing history doesn't mean that things didn't happen and it doesn't educate future generations. 

 

Not sure that I agree with the thought that one can "identify as....." because that never ends and people can be identifying as all sorts of things if it's allowed to continue. Likewise with having to call people they/them/it/whatever just seems like a nonsense to me.

 

So I'm not sure if I am Woke or not, or maybe just old-fashioned, however I go about my life just the same as I always have, and probably always will until the day I pop my clogs!

[OneMoreFarang]

43 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

As long as you have money i guess yes. 

Except if the MeToo crowd is against you. You know, women are always right! 

[ChrisKC]

20 minutes ago, connda said:

Another term for a 'fact checker' is 'censor.'

I grew up in a day and age where censorship was frowned upon, and as a US citizens, the concept of censoring all but what one group who have been blessed by the status quo have to say and dismiss all other sides of the argument as 'false' really runs counter to 1st Amendment Freedom of Speech.

We're censoring you for your own safety!   Tosh.

I wonder if there are "Debate Clubs" in High School like there were when I attended.
It's sort of difficult to debate an issue that you are told only has "one and only one" factual basis and all other views are fake.  Using that logic, the stars, moon, and sun revolves around a flat earth.

Another term for a 'fact checker' is 'censor.'

 

In the context of the OP,  it isn't!

 

It isn't about 'how things used to be'.

 

Other correct terms  are, homework or research.

[connda]

38 minutes ago, Tropposurfer said:

I believe in people being who they chose to be, for women to have the right to decide what they do with their own bodies,

If women have the right to decide what they do with their own bodies, then...
...they have the right to decide to take a Covid shot or not.  Their bodies, there choice.

It can't work both ways as it becomes illogical tripe and utter nonsense.  You can't include one instance of "my body, my choice" and in the same breathe dismiss the other instance of "my body, my choice."

But the argument will shape up like this (even though it's flawed as Covid vaccines don't impart sterilizing immunity):  "You need the Covid shot or you'll infect others."  (Sorry, the CDC wolked that statement back.  It it original form the CDC director stated that those who have had Covid shots don't harbor the SARS-Cov-2 virus and can't infect others)
Attribution:

CDC reverses statement by director that vaccinated people are no longer contagious

by Joseph Guzman | April 2, 2021 | Apr. 02, 2021

So what was accepted as a fact (those who have had Covid shots don't harbor the SARS-Cov-2 virus and can't infect others) was in fact....not factual or based in fact - and yet - the statement was presented as fact!  Which is why I don't trust so-called fact checkers or for that matter 'experts.'

And if women have the right to decide what they do with their own bodies, then...
...men do also.  Just saying.

[ignore it]

Fact checkers is it.

Read it without my reading specs first time.

But anyway, really don't know anybody that likes fat chicks so who cares what they think.

[HappyExpat57]

Just today I got a retort from someone I've known for decades. I had posted a meme comparing 45 and President Biden how 45 had sheltered down in a bunker during protests a few years back and President Biden just visited a war zone. He accused me of being, and I quote, "extremely delusional." THIS is the kind of sh!t that separates people. It is not in question whether these things happened. They are facts.

 

When people will not accept facts and, instead, soak their minds in the cesspool of bullsh!t being broadcast by verified liars, we cannot come to valid agreements. I refuse to accept their "opinion" when I know it's not true.

[BritManToo]

Just now, HappyExpat57 said:

Just today I got a retort from someone I've known for decades. I had posted a meme comparing 45 and President Biden how 45 had sheltered down in a bunker during protests a few years back and President Biden just visited a war zone. He accused me of being, and I quote, "extremely delusional." THIS is the kind of sh!t that separates people. It is not in question whether these things happened. They are facts.

 

When people will not accept facts and, instead, soak their minds in the cesspool of bullsh!t being broadcast by verified liars, we cannot come to valid agreements. I refuse to accept their "opinion" when I know it's not true.

The difference being Biden probably didn't know he was visiting a war zone.

[HappyExpat57]

Just now, BritManToo said:

The difference being Biden probably didn't know he was visiting a war zone.

In the immortal words of Bugs Bunny, "I knew I should've taken that left turn at Albuquerque.”

[BritManToo]

17 minutes ago, connda said:

So what was accepted as a fact (those who have had Covid shots don't harbor the SARS-Cov-2 virus and can't infect others) was in fact....not factual or based in fact - and yet - the statement was presented as fact!  Which is why I don't trust so-called fact checkers or for that matter 'experts.'

I actually had 2x COVID vaccinations based on false information issued by the CDC.

Where can I apply for compensation based on their misinformation?

[hotchilli]

6 hours ago, ozimoron said:

How likely are you to change your opinion on any matter when you see reasonably argued and credible fact checking indicating that your preconception was false?

most of the time

[zzaa09]

6 hours ago, proton said:

who checks the fact checkers?

Of course.

And then....who checks the fact checkers that are checking the original fact checkers?

This could continue on for generations. 

????

[Kwasaki]

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Except if the MeToo crowd is against you. You know, women are always right! 

Depends what you want from her on whether she is right or not. ????

[Lucky Bones]

My father grew onions.

I grow opinions.

Eventually they can both make you cry.????????

 

[Skeptic7]

Yes it matters (and should to everyone). No problem admitting such if convincingly and objectively shown to be incorrect with supporting evidence contrary to my current understanding. This is how science and the scientific method works. This was formerly called "learning"...and/or learning something new. Used to be a good thing. Nowadays...not so much. 

[Thingamabob]

A rather strange question. In my caseI I'm never wrong so no need for checking.

[OneMoreFarang]

3 hours ago, Tropposurfer said:

Yo ozi I think maybe your adult, mature, critical thinking is going over people heads.

 

A fact is a fact. That's why its called a fact folks. 

It is not a subjective matter but purely objective e.g. the sky is blue, water is wet, the sun is so many kilometres away from the earth, a lie is a lie because despite the weight if clear evidence a person or entity choses to offer up a falsity in contradiction of said fact, e.g Trump is a lifelong serial sex offender and corporate criminal, ands as it appears from the mounting weight of FACTS a traitor to his nation.

How amazing, and damaging to the whole planet (given we now live in a globally instantaneous communication matrix) that so many so-called adults are so wedded to delusional thinking that despite the clear weight of irrefutable facts they persist in believing otherwise.

Unfortunately there are only some facts which are really facts.

And then there are lots of situations which look like facts but there are not proven facts.

I.e. if a certain politician would be a lifelong serial sex offender and corporate criminal, why is he not in jail?

I am no fan of that guy and possibly he is what you write, but until now that is no fact.

And that is the problem with certain "facts" - not just about politicians.

 

[mikebike]

8 hours ago, ozimoron said:

That is always a feature of fact checking.

Unfortunately it is not always a feature. 

[KhunLA]

3 hours ago, Red Forever said:

The fact that US and UK have recently elected such outrageous liars as Trump and Blobby Johnson shows the absolute need to fact check.

Try naming a politician that hasn't lied .... 

... we'll wait ... or not

 

I can't think of one Yank, other countries, I'll just assume I'm correct and wait to be corrected.

[ozimoron]

12 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Unfortunately there are only some facts which are really facts.

And then there are lots of situations which look like facts but there are not proven facts.

I.e. if a certain politician would be a lifelong serial sex offender and corporate criminal, why is he not in jail?

I am no fan of that guy and possibly he is what you write, but until now that is no fact.

And that is the problem with certain "facts" - not just about politicians.

 

Unless a fact is proven it simply isn't a fact.

[BritManToo]

3 hours ago, ChrisKC said:

Other correct terms  are, homework or research.

Research using Google/Youtube/Facebook/Twitter that censors everything.

The idea you can research anything on a heavily censored platform is laughable.

[NoshowJones]

I have had my opinion on things change after listening to someone who has earned a lot of my respect and look up to.

[BritManToo]

42 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I.e. if a certain politician would be a lifelong serial sex offender and corporate criminal, why is he not in jail?

The Clintons need to go to jail first.

And lets not forget Chappaquiddick.

 

Trump never pretended to be anything he wasn't, not being Hillary was enough to get him elected.

[NoshowJones]

9 hours ago, Hummin said:

A fact check should if of interest lead to further investigations to learn why I was wrong in the first place.

Right up into adulthood, I thought that The Yankee's were the goodies in the American civil war, maybe because the US Cavalry were always based as the good guys when I loved watching cowboy movies as a kid.

When I grew up and started reading the history, I realised that the north were the instigators and it was the Confederates who really were the good guys.

[KhunLA]

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

The Clintons need to go to jail first.

Another one of their/Clinton's associates (epstein conx) just hit the news, along with, bit the dust.   Hung to a tree with a shotgun blast to the chest ... suicide, no shotgun or note to be found.

 

On Topic ... don't mess with corrupt officials, if your life doesn't depend on it.

[ozimoron]

9 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Research using Google/Youtube/Facebook/Twitter that censors everything.

The idea you can research anything on a heavily censored platform is laughable.

If you don't then don't claim it. It's against the rules. I believe that it's entirely possible to research nearly anything. Only conspiracy theories afficionados would claim it isn't.

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Another one of their/Clinton's associates (epstein conx) just hit the news, along with, bit the dust.   Hung to a tree with a shotgun blast to the chest ... suicide, no shotgun or note to be found.

 

On Topic ... don't mess with corrupt officials, if your life doesn't depend on it.

Unsupported BS What part about the rules don't you understand?

[Hummin]

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Another one of their/Clinton's associates (epstein conx) just hit the news, along with, bit the dust.   Hung to a tree with a shotgun blast to the chest ... suicide, no shotgun or note to be found.

 

On Topic ... don't mess with corrupt officials, if your life doesn't depend on it.

No politics was the requirements for this thread 

[ChrisKC]

Facebook and Twitter are not MY sources of anything requiring truth or scientific significance.

 

Google and YouTube are censored but certainly not everything and not all YouTubers. And I go there often enough to trust a great number of them and I stand by my general comment of fact checking by research as best as can be done to refute obvious "opinions" or to establish a position from which I can form a reasonable judgement.

 

If you need to establish what is correct or not, where do YOU go? Or will you ignore all the sources of what you read and hear and believe what you want to believe?

 

And while I am here; whether matters about most topics are someone's opinion, true, partly true, a lie or anything in between, very little has much impact on my life and I cannot control it, so I take it or leave it and maybe one day some truths may emerge that I and everyone else can agree is the real deal.

 

Not everybody in the world is lying, deliberately misleading or giving misinformation.