The insanity, dishonesty, ignorance, & delusion of zealots, egalitarians, race deniers, science deniers, religious fundamentalists, & other ideologues. (BRI hypocrisy?)

"Classic" Independent Thinker article from BRI, 2017. Lots of flare, and flamboyance here.

the_insanity_dishonesty_ignorance_delusion_of_zealots_egalitarians_race_deniers_science_deniers_reli

By Independent Thinker. BRI.

In response to a litany of egalitarian nonsense being spewed by some of the posters here (as always), and a complete lack of respect for, and complete ignorance of the value, as well as structure of the scientific method, as well as an apparent complete lack of respect for knowledge, scientists, and an insult to reason quite frankly. Egalitarians, zealots, you know who you are do I have to call you out by user name?

The egalitarians, the religious zealots, the extreme liberals, and others persistently show a lack of knowledge and understanding of how reasoning should be conducted properly, and what the proper methods of scientific enquiry are. In science to be objective, and to have any correspondence with reality, you start out first from the facts, you study them carefully, systematically, and control for various variables, you devise studies, and experiments to determine how one variable determines, or affects another, once these studies are done conclusions are reached using the simplest explanations that fit the data. Science helps to understand the relationship between variables, by recognizing the patterns that govern the world. This starts with the hypothesis, and uses methods, to collect data, and gather results, which is then analyzed to form the best possible, most elegant, and simplest conclusion, without unnecessary hypotheses.

Zealots, and ideologues of both right, and left, but especially left since now I am focusing on them, essentially do the reverse of this process. They decide what they want the conclusion to be, they declare that something must be a certain way, without evidence, without supporting arguments, only their own muddled perceptions. They claim that no evidence for the contrary exists. They decide what the theory must be.

Then they work backwards arguing from the conclusion back towards the facts, deciding what the facts must actually be. Any evidence presented to the contrary is questioned, and disputed at every possible angle. Speculations are given as to why the facts of the studies do not support the conclusion, and fatal irredeemable flaws are "discovered", only later to be dispelled by a careful consideration of them. But this, however, does not stop the zealots, no, in fact they simply find more arguments, more points of contention ad hoc , and they will continue doing it without prior knowledge of the subject matter; without justification. They never stop to explain their purported flaws, and try to support and justify them with reasons e.g. There is a flaw in this study because the cause of this effect may be attributable to something other than what is being claimed as the cause. They do not go on to explain, and expand on these reasons they merely offer unjustified speculation that may, or may not be true, or relevant. However, the initial studies are discounted in every possible way, they a priori must be false irrespective of data, studies, tests, and experiments. If studies conducted say otherwise, they MUST be false, the researchers MUST be incompetent, there is no way that it COULD be true. No evidence is ever good enough, there is always a "flaw" discovered that is "fatal" to the study.

The facts that the zealots use to support their theories are all claims, are speculative, and are not grounded in scientific thinking, or method. There is no objective way to test any of their ideas, they just speculate that they must be this way based on experience. To make an example of how unsound this is consider this: Aristotle's discarded theory of motion that everything tends to it's own natural place must have also seemed convincing, it corresponds to common experience. Heavy things fall, and come to a rest, light things float in the air. He also claimed that motion results in going from potentiality to actuality. (Okay long discussion with this). Another hypothesis that he made, is that things fall with a speed directly proportional to their weights, and inversely proportional to the density of the medium that they are in. This all seemed reasonable for hundreds, and thousands of years. People took Aristotle's teachings on faith, they could not be questioned due to the dogma of Scholasticism. Yet, then Galileo began doing experiments and dispelled what others had simply believed to what they thought was reasonable from experience, and faith. Science abounds with examples like this. Never argue from a predetermined conclusion to the facts. It is an imposition of desires, of ideology on nature, and it does not correspond to it and never will.

It is claimed that science is false, the method is inadequate, and their [the zealots] powers of faith and divination reveal the "truth" to them. They have no arguments, all they do is make claims, speculations, move the goalposts, doubt everything, and use it as if it were the truth. All experts on the topic are wrong for them, they are all incompetent. Everyone who does not view things as they do is incompetent in some way. Only those that tell them what they already believe are deemed to be "competent." For them the simple proposition that assuming someone who is reasonably competent and studies quite a lot of a certain topic, and accumulates vast knowledge of it is more qualified to discuss it than someone who knows absolutely nothing of it, is false. This argument is true almost by definition, yet, they will argue even that, or state that the one who holds a dissenting view to theirs is incompetent every time. You can see this with my debates with the egalitarian zealots, or the ones pretending to be (feel free to look them over if you wish, but prepare, for a study in stupidity, ignorance, insanity, and never ending attempts at refutation, contradiction, and denial, via the methods described above and below).

They never take the time to actually learn something of the subject first, they declare that it MUST be wrong, and then start picking at everything and trying to find plausible (to them objections to the data). This does not bother them as in their epistemology this is perfectly valid, they have critical thinking skills, and reasoning, yet they never studied this topic formally, they think that they argue well.

These people are impossible to reason with as are the conspiracy theorists, or Flat Earthers, no matter what you say no matter how you say it they will continue bellowing "it's flat I tell you it's flat!" "it's turtles all the way down!". All races and people are equal, IT MUST BE LIKE THIS, any idea to the contrary is idiotic. Of course, what is truly idiotic is them, and the way that they think.

Remember one of their main tactics, as well as those of conspiracy theorists is ad hoc, which is basically the following:

"Ad hoc is a fallacious debating tactic (also called a "just so story" or an "ad hoc rescue") in which an explanation of why a particular thing may be is substituted for an argument as to why it is; since it is therefore not an argument, it is not technically a fallacy, but is usually listed as one because it is a substitution for a valid argument. It is similar in form to moving the goalposts, but protects the argument by adding additional speculative terms rather than changing the meaning of existing ones.

Users of ad hoc claims generally believe the excuses and rationalisations serve to shore up the original hypothesis, but in fact each additional speculative term weakens it. This is both due to the speculations being based simply on the faith that there might be an explanation, and because each additional term makes the hypothesis weaker according to the principle of parsimony.

"Possibly," "probably," "maybe," "might" and "could" are all good markers of ad hoc claims."

They employ this technique to try to dispute the results of scientific studies that are contrary to their ideologies. When you ask them what kind of studies would be adequate, they would always claim none, or even when those studies exist they would try to find more "flaws" ad infinitum. They are also lazy, they never actually want to put work into studying, just making more asinine arguments. They question and speculate, and persistently shift the burden of proof, and demand an unreasonable amount of proof for every detail of every aspect, but the persistent trend is to always deny. Remember: It can't be true, I know, I believe, it is idiotic if it were.

What they have is fervent delirious faith that protects them:

"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." 

-Ambrose Bierce

(Also Zealots of all faiths whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or whatever are generally partially insane, or mentally disabled in some ways, as are the egalitarians, SJW's and so forth)

Anyway, as the madmen that they are they will never admit to their madness, and delusions, but project them onto others, and accuse them without justification of doing the same. They are a case in point.

This channel seems to shelter them, or be sympathetic to them, despite their obvious fallacious, insane line of thinking. The ones on the right, the Neo-N@zis, antisemites, and so forth are challenged, criticized, and their methods are disputed, their logic and reasoning even ridiculed. However when these same methods are used by the egalitarians, the liberals, the pro-semites, the religious zealots, & whomever else, they are not subject to the same criticism, and scrutiny. Praise is the only thing they typically get, they're never called out on their insanity as they should be. Completely ridiculous. These kinds of tactics, and methods have no place in reasonable discourse, and these people create an atmosphere of a cult, a fringe, or some kind of religion of logical fallacies and reasoning. The hypocrisy of it all, and the insanity.

On a more blunt note arguing with these r3tards, these d1psh1ts is a complete waste of time. It never goes anywhere, regardless of what ever you do. Here is a similar demonstration of it illustrated in a monty python sketch:

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2hwqn9

Anyone who doesn't clearly, at least more or less see what they are doing, or is unable to see it after being explained like this is probably one of them or simply retarded, and delusional beyond hope. (PS: to those of this variety here's a much deserved: Go fornicate yourselves. You hypocritical & ridiculous nutjob idiots.)