There in lies the problem with all MSM these days which is why I choose to seek other sources.  Everything is so slanted it is appalling.  

If you did watch it are you discrediting everything brought up or just the conclusion?

Re-read what I wrote.  I already answered that question.  I'm not discrediting anything.  I'm saying I don't want to waste my time on a questionable source- a source which has an obvious agenda.  I'm sure everything they say is a fact.  But you can put together a string of facts that "prove" anything.  If you don't understand that, then you will be subject to constant manipulation.  

Epoch Times is a virulently anti-Chinese publication.  That's okay, as long as you understand that that is where everything starts for them.  What they say may or may not be true, but you have to start with the realization that they are not journalists doing an investigation.  They are opinion people out to persuade everyone to follow their point of view.  Their purpose isn't to inform you.  Their purpose is to persuade you.  You have to understand this to function in a modern society, or else you will be a sheep.

You are fixating on the conclusion, toss that out.  If the facts are the facts what is your conclusion?  The source should be irrelevant.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Re-read what I wrote.  I already answered that question.  I'm not discrediting anything.  I'm saying I don't want to waste my time on a questionable source- a source which has an obvious agenda.  I'm sure everything they say is a fact.  But you can put together a string of facts that "prove" anything.  If you don't understand that, then you will be subject to constant manipulation.  

Epoch Times is a virulently anti-Chinese publication.  That's okay, as long as you understand that that is where everything starts for them.  What they say may or may not be true, but you have to start with the realization that they are not journalists doing an investigation.  They are opinion people out to persuade everyone to follow their point of view.  Their purpose isn't to inform you.  Their purpose is to persuade you.  You have to understand this to function in a modern society, or else you will be a sheep.

You are fixating on the conclusion, toss that out.  If the facts are the facts what is your conclusion?  The source should be irrelevant.

Tell that to Mr. Trump....oh and 80% of this forum.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

There are videos of workers at the Wuhan Institute going to bat caves and collecting "every known virus strain" from the bats and from ticks on the bats.  They acknowledge how dangerous their "research" is and hope it will never be used against humans.  I believe Tucker Carlson ran a segment a few weeks ago about this.

As reputable as Tucker is, I'd like to see some facts behind this before I scratch the "fake news" proclamation that's itching to be let out. 

I'm not saying that I don't trust you; and I'm not saying that I do. But I don't.

You are fixating on the conclusion, toss that out.  If the facts are the facts what is your conclusion?  The source should be irrelevant.

Tell that to Mr. Trump....oh and 80% of this forum.

LOL  Consider yourself told.   

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

As reputable as Tucker is, I'd like to see some facts behind this before I scratch the "fake news" proclamation that's itching to be let out. 

I'm not saying that I don't trust you; and I'm not saying that I do. But I don't.

Tell that to Mr. Trump....oh and 80% of this forum.

LOL  Consider yourself told.   

I absolutely will judge a "fact" based on its source. Kelly-Ann told me I should.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

I don't think people are very good a compartmentalizing. I look at information in a way similar to the Schrödinger's cat thought experiment. If you don't know if information is true or false, you treat it as both true and false until you can open the box. This allows you to entertain ideas without excepting them. Too many people start with the conclusion, then omit or receive facts based on if it fits their worldview or not. If you're willing to entertain all ideas, I think it helps fight against your own bias. I am also reluctant to trust Epoch Times due to their insistence that it be called the CCP virus. This is an odd way to categorize something and suggest there's an anti-CCP bias there. This doesn't mean they are incorrect, though. I put their information in a box and treat it as both true and untrue until I can verify (though a lot of what they posted there can be verified by multiple sources).

---

Knives coming out for Pope Faucu. These press briefings are about to be LIT!!!

---

Just heard the news.... Ghostbusters 3 delayed until march 5.... ok folks. This is REAL NOW!!!

---

Knives coming out for Pope Faucu.  These press briefings are about to be LIT!!!

---

Just heard the news....  Ghostbusters 3 delayed until march 5....  ok folks.  This is REAL NOW!!!

My prediction two weeks ago was two weeks ahead of its time.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

Re-read what I wrote.  I already answered that question.  I'm not discrediting anything.  I'm saying I don't want to waste my time on a questionable source- a source which has an obvious agenda.  I'm sure everything they say is a fact.  But you can put together a string of facts that "prove" anything.  If you don't understand that, then you will be subject to constant manipulation.  

Epoch Times is a virulently anti-Chinese publication.  That's okay, as long as you understand that that is where everything starts for them.  What they say may or may not be true, but you have to start with the realization that they are not journalists doing an investigation.  They are opinion people out to persuade everyone to follow their point of view.  Their purpose isn't to inform you.  Their purpose is to persuade you.  You have to understand this to function in a modern society, or else you will be a sheep.

You are fixating on the conclusion, toss that out.  If the facts are the facts what is your conclusion?  The source should be irrelevant.

For some reason, you guys are struggling with reading comprehension.  I'm not fixating on the conclusion.  I have said over and over the conclusion may be right and it may be wrong.  That's not the point.  The point I was making was about Epoch Times.  They are not a good source, because they come at this with an agenda.  Anyone who knows anything about Epoch Times would know this.  What they are saying may or may not be true, but if you want to just accept what they say, then you are being a sheep and allowing yourself to be led.  

Do you know who is behind Epoch Times?  Do you know who these so-called "experts" they show in that video are?  Do you know if everything they said is factual?  Do you know if those are the only relevant facts?  Do you know if there are any other facts they left out because they didn't support their thesis?  

This is not a good source.  This is National Enquirer level credibility.  You need better sources than that.  

Again, I don't know how many different ways I can say this- I am not disputing their conclusions.  But I can't accept them, either, because they are not a good source of information.  

You guys apparently don't care who is telling you something as long as they are telling you something you want to hear.  Don't you have any standards?  I would need a better source for that story before I accepted it at face value.  That's all I'm saying.

---

You are fixating on the conclusion, toss that out.  If the facts are the facts what is your conclusion?  The source should be irrelevant.

For some reason, you guys are struggling with reading comprehension.  I'm not fixating on the conclusion.  I have said over and over the conclusion may be right and it may be wrong.  That's not the point.  The point I was making was about Epoch Times.  They are not a good source, because they come at this with an agenda.  Anyone who knows anything about Epoch Times would know this.  What they are saying may or may not be true, but if you want to just accept what they say, then you are being a sheep and allowing yourself to be led.  

Do you know who is behind Epoch Times?  Do you know who these so-called "experts" they show in that video are?  Do you know if everything they said is factual?  Do you know if those are the only relevant facts?  Do you know if there are any other facts they left out because they didn't support their thesis?  

This is not a good source.  This is National Enquirer level credibility.  You need better sources than that.  

Again, I don't know how many different ways I can say this- I am not disputing their conclusions.  But I can't accept them, either, because they are not a good source of information.  

You guys apparently don't care who is telling you something as long as they are telling you something you want to hear.  Don't you have any standards?  I would need a better source for that story before I accepted it at face value.  That's all I'm saying.

Bingo. Very difficult to reason with that kind of thinking.

---

I don't think people are very good a compartmentalizing. I look at information in a way similar to the Schrödinger's cat thought experiment. If you don't know if information is true or false, you  treat it as both true and false until you can open the box. This allows you to entertain ideas without excepting them. Too many people start with the conclusion, then omit or receive facts based on if it fits their worldview or not. If you're willing to entertain all ideas, I think it helps fight against your own bias. I am also reluctant to trust Epoch Times due to their insistence that it be called the CCP virus. This is an odd way to categorize something and suggest there's an anti-CCP bias there. This doesn't mean they are incorrect, though. I put their information in a box and treat it as both true and untrue until I can verify (though a lot of what they posted there can be verified by multiple sources).

This!

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

You are fixating on the conclusion, toss that out.  If the facts are the facts what is your conclusion?  The source should be irrelevant.

For some reason, you guys are struggling with reading comprehension.  I'm not fixating on the conclusion.  I have said over and over the conclusion may be right and it may be wrong.  That's not the point.  The point I was making was about Epoch Times.  They are not a good source, because they come at this with an agenda.  Anyone who knows anything about Epoch Times would know this.  What they are saying may or may not be true, but if you want to just accept what they say, then you are being a sheep and allowing yourself to be led.  

Do you know who is behind Epoch Times?  Do you know who these so-called "experts" they show in that video are?  Do you know if everything they said is factual?  Do you know if those are the only relevant facts?  Do you know if there are any other facts they left out because they didn't support their thesis?  

This is not a good source.  This is National Enquirer level credibility.  You need better sources than that.  

Again, I don't know how many different ways I can say this- I am not disputing their conclusions.  But I can't accept them, either, because they are not a good source of information.  

You guys apparently don't care who is telling you something as long as they are telling you something you want to hear.  Don't you have any standards?  I would need a better source for that story before I accepted it at face value.  That's all I'm saying.

That's just childish.  If u dont think a source is credible that's fine.  We all know the South China institute of Technology is a notorious right wing outfit.

---

For some reason, you guys are struggling with reading comprehension.  I'm not fixating on the conclusion.  I have said over and over the conclusion may be right and it may be wrong.  That's not the point.  The point I was making was about Epoch Times.  They are not a good source, because they come at this with an agenda.  Anyone who knows anything about Epoch Times would know this.  What they are saying may or may not be true, but if you want to just accept what they say, then you are being a sheep and allowing yourself to be led.  

Do you know who is behind Epoch Times?  Do you know who these so-called "experts" they show in that video are?  Do you know if everything they said is factual?  Do you know if those are the only relevant facts?  Do you know if there are any other facts they left out because they didn't support their thesis?  

This is not a good source.  This is National Enquirer level credibility.  You need better sources than that.  

Again, I don't know how many different ways I can say this- I am not disputing their conclusions.  But I can't accept them, either, because they are not a good source of information.  

You guys apparently don't care who is telling you something as long as they are telling you something you want to hear.  Don't you have any standards?  I would need a better source for that story before I accepted it at face value.  That's all I'm saying.

That's just childish.  If u dont think a source is credible that's fine.  We all know the South China institute of Technology is a notorious right wing outfit.

JESUS, both of you are saying the same thing.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

That's just childish.  If u dont think a source is credible that's fine.  We all know the South China institute of Technology is a notorious right wing outfit.

JESUS, both of you are saying the same thing.

---

Dudes, the 6:30pm NBC news isnt entirely about covid 19. Things are getting better. We made it..

---

Dudes, the 6:30pm NBC news isnt entirely about covid 19.  Things are getting better. We made it..

They probably realized the 24-7 attacks on the President are wearing thin, bad for ratings and helping to re-elect the President.

---

Dudes, the 6:30pm NBC news isnt entirely about covid 19.  Things are getting better. We made it..

It's interesting, POTUS is forming his taskforce on reopening the economy and the Democrats governors are talking about their own coalitions to plan reopening, not a full on "you're choosing ur 401k over your grandparents" play.  I do think things are cautiously on the upswing!

---

Dudes, the 6:30pm NBC news isnt entirely about covid 19.  Things are getting better. We made it..

It's interesting, POTUS is forming his taskforce on reopening the economy and the Democrats governors are talking about their own coalitions to plan reopening, not a full on "you're choosing ur 401k over your grandparents" play.  I do think things are cautiously on the upswing!

Hopefully it’s not just the eye of the storm where caught in thinking this is almost over

---

Dudes, the 6:30pm NBC news isnt entirely about covid 19.  Things are getting better. We made it..

They probably realized the 24-7 attacks on the President are wearing thin, bad for ratings and helping to re-elect the President.

He's just using the time to show videos of how he thinks he did great and how he's been treated unfairly by the press.

Which begs the next question..........

Why have press conferences at all?

---

Dudes, the 6:30pm NBC news isnt entirely about covid 19.  Things are getting better. We made it..

It's interesting, POTUS is forming his taskforce on reopening the economy and the Democrats governors are talking about their own coalitions to plan reopening, not a full on "you're choosing ur 401k over your grandparents" play.  I do think things are cautiously on the upswing!

I actually think Florida is about to be the next NY. I'll be happy if I'm wrong, but the pessimist in me doesn't think I will be

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

They probably realized the 24-7 attacks on the President are wearing thin, bad for ratings and helping to re-elect the President.

He's just using the time to show videos of how he thinks he did great and how he's been treated unfairly by the press.

Which begs the next question..........

Why have press conferences at all?

---

It's interesting, POTUS is forming his taskforce on reopening the economy and the Democrats governors are talking about their own coalitions to plan reopening, not a full on "you're choosing ur 401k over your grandparents" play.  I do think things are cautiously on the upswing!

I actually think Florida is about to be the next NY. I'll be happy if I'm wrong, but the pessimist in me doesn't think I will be

To your first point, to inform the masses without a filter.  It also in my opinion exposed a majority of the press corp as partisan hacks.  So many questions were nothing but gotcha questions.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

---

It's interesting, POTUS is forming his taskforce on reopening the economy and the Democrats governors are talking about their own coalitions to plan reopening, not a full on "you're choosing ur 401k over your grandparents" play.  I do think things are cautiously on the upswing!

I actually think Florida is about to be the next NY. I'll be happy if I'm wrong, but the pessimist in me doesn't think I will be

Florida can't become like New York, unless we start relaxing or ignoring the social distancing guidelines too early.

If we just relax the guidelines because the number of known, active cases is low, we will have another outbreak, and it could be really bad like the one New York is having.  

Of course, the numbers have to be low before we relax anything. But we also need a plan to keep them low without social distancing.

---

He's just using the time to show videos of how he thinks he did great and how he's been treated unfairly by the press.

Which begs the next question..........

Why have press conferences at all?

---

I actually think Florida is about to be the next NY. I'll be happy if I'm wrong, but the pessimist in me doesn't think I will be

To your first point, to inform the masses without a filter.  It also in my opinion exposed a majority of the press corp as partisan hacks.  So many questions were nothing but gotcha questions.

When a new President starts his very first press conference by belligerently lying about having the most votes and the largest inauguration crowd ever, two petty and verifiable lies, he doesn't really have any right to complain that those same reporters are now biased against him.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.