Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Yep, it's (abuse of) religion as a path to political control and power. Robert C On 4/6/13 1:53 PM, Douglas Roberts wrote: Don't see the religion factor? Look again. --Doug FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

I'm deeply insulted that my church was not given mentioned. After all, He boiled for our sins. --Doug On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote: > Apropos of nothing, I was looking at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups the other day and > discovered that the Rast

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Apropos of nothing, I was looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups the other day and discovered that the Rastafari outnumber the Unitarians by about 70,000 adherents. They are locked in battle for the last place on that particular list, though they both outnumber the Scientol

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

I'm gluten-curious and avoid ballpark hot dogs. On Saturday, April 6, 2013, Douglas Roberts wrote: > Fortunately we Pastafarian men of the cloth (tablecloth) do > not proselytize. > > --Doug > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Steve Smith > > > wrote: > >> >> Yep, I think 90% is in the ballpar

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Yep, I think 90% is in the ballpark, but it's not the percentage as much as the trend which bothers me. That, plus the fact that "we" are just passively allowing the degradation of education, and the teaching of critical thought to continue as is in Texas, and other parts of the religion-domi

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Yep, I think 90% is in the ballpark, but it's not the percentage as much as the trend which bothers me. That, plus the fact that "we" are just passively allowing the degradation of education, and the teaching of critical thought to continue as is in Texas, and other parts of the religion-dominated

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Robert - Wow... what a *mixed bag* of *baby and bathwater*! My cynical, anti-Texas, anti-Right, anti-Christian, anti-Authoritarian side cringes at this kind of stuff... yet reading through it I find some gems of "truthiness" that are hard to ignore. This kind of rhetoric is clearly laced wi

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

> >>>> >>>> >>>> Gotta stop thinking about this. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Nick >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Friam [m

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

y about what it MEANS that Snopes doesn’t >>> have anything about chemtrails. >>> >>> >>> >>> Gotta stop thinking about this. >>> >>> >>> >>> Nick >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@r

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

edfish.com>] *On Behalf Of *Douglas Roberts *Sent:* Saturday, April 06, 2013 10:27 AM *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] just the facts -1 for factcheck.org <http://factcheck.org>: they don't say anything about c

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

at it MEANS that Snopes doesn’t >>> have anything about chemtrails. >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Gotta stop thinking about this. >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Nick >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *From:* Friam [mai

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

anything about chemtrails. >> >> ** ** >> >> Gotta stop thinking about this. >> >> ** ** >> >> Nick >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com > 'cvml', 'friam-boun...@redfish.com');>

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

>> >> ** ** >> >> Gotta stop thinking about this. >> >> ** ** >> >> Nick >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Douglas >> Roberts >> *Sent:* Saturday, April 06, 2013 1

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

10:27 AM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] just the facts > > ** ** > > -1 for factcheck.org: they don't say anything about chemtrails. > > On Sa

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

y Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] just the facts > > ** ** > > -1 for factcheck.org: they don't say anything about chemtrails. > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Owen Densmore > wrote: > > +1 for http://www.factcheck.o

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Of Douglas Roberts Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 10:27 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] just the facts -1 for factcheck.org: they don't say anything about chemtrails. On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Owen Densmore wrote: +1 for http://ww

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

I suspect that if one were to conduct a survey about the belief that the US Government is trying to poison us all by flying these special airplanes at 30,000 feet to spray nasty chemical poisons (hence all those horrible * chemtrails* that you can clearly see in the sky), at least 40% of Santa Fe's

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

True, their focus as I understand it is assigning a "grade" for political wonks current statements, with source material supporting their grade of their evaluation. Chemtrails? WTF? -- Owen On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Douglas Roberts wrote: > -1 for factcheck.org: they don't say anything

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

-1 for factcheck.org: they don't say anything about chemtrails. On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Owen Densmore wrote: > +1 for http://www.factcheck.org/ > > > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe a

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

+1 for http://www.factcheck.org/ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Robert - > The thing is, the [honorable] idea behind justfacts.com is a good one. Yup, *I* wanted to believe in them... if you hadn't prompted me by warning us there was a parallel blog *with* an agenda, I might have swallowed more of their hogwash (until Cody, "the Dood") shared his own fol

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Democracy Now - PBS TV 9.1 - on now (4/5/13 5:30pm) ! Just talked to the author Robert W. McChesney of Digital Disconnect about problems with journalism. Coincidence? -- Robert C On 4/5/13 4:30 PM, Robert

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

So is the consensus that justfacts.com is perhaps not just wrong but misleading and deliberately deceptive while claiming not to be so at the same time? We really need unbiased investigative journalism. Does the Cente

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

good point On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote: > Oh no, someone is wrong on the internet! > > -- rec -- > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:56 PM, cody dooderson wrote: > >> This website pisses me off every time i try to check their sources. Why >> did they even put sources in if

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Oh no, someone is wrong on the internet! -- rec -- On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:56 PM, cody dooderson wrote: > This website pisses me off every time i try to check their sources. Why > did they even put sources in if they were going to blatantly lie about what > they contain. > > Their caption rea

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

This website pisses me off every time i try to check their sources. Why did they even put sources in if they were going to blatantly lie about what they contain. Their caption reads "* The following pictures are of U.S. submarines surfacing at the North Pole in March of 1959 and August of 1962:" N

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

On 4/5/13 2:45 PM, Bruce Sherwood wrote: It is understandable that many people can't believe that we puny humans could possibly have a big impact on the environment. My parents used to refer with reverence and awe to "the inexhaustible sea".. My favorite example is the line (paraphrased) fro

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Glen - Take your own data. Excellent suggestion! For some reason, it made me remember this site. The Centre for Investigative Journalism http://www.tcij.org/ Our own Tom Johnson! No, that is: http://www.analyticjournalism.com/ ... My own holy grail is *context*. I appreciate point

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

It is understandable that many people can't believe that we puny humans could possibly have a big impact on the environment. My parents used to refer with reverence and awe to "the inexhaustible sea".. Bruce FRIAM Applied Complexity

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Arlo - I don't think Democracy! Now purports to be 'just the facts' - while of course they wouldn't say they /distort/ the truth, mostly they are devoted to news and interviews about left-leaning topics, or civil/humanitarian rights in general. Fox News, on the other hand, is equally focusse

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Take your own data. Excellent suggestion! For some reason, it made me remember this site. The Centre for Investigative Journalism http://www.tcij.org/ I think there is a middle ground between the sensationalism of our infotainment outlets and the often daunting task of gathering our own

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

I don't think Democracy! Now purports to be 'just the facts' - while of course they wouldn't say they *distort* the truth, mostly they are devoted to news and interviews about left-leaning topics, or civil/humanitarian rights in general. Fox News, on the other hand, is equally focussed on conservat

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

I also spent 15 minutes or so perusing some of the more politically polarizing topics, and it didn't take long to realize the site tilts pretty heavily toward the right. It's easy to cherry pick just the facts that support one's own position. Does anyone have suggestions for a site that actually

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

On 4/5/13 11:34 AM, Robert J. Cordingley wrote: From Abortion, Climate Change, Gun Control to Social Security and Taxes, the http://www.justfacts.com/ offers just the [distilled] facts on about 14 major topics. I thought this site with its emphasis on objectivity might perhaps be useful to the

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Lying with statistics, I don't think that firearm homicide or firearm suicide (the categories in the second table) count as firearm accidental deaths (the category in the first graph). -- rec -- On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 12:45 PM, cody dooderson wrote: > That looked cool. I was particularily inte

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

That looked cool. I was particularily interested in what they said about gun control( http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp ). I went to the source of their information and it was totally different from what they reported. They attribute the data to the source *[120] Dataset: "20 Leading Causes