And if you do have a great source that synthesizes a lot of the data, they will say it's debonked. No pleasing these people. Best to just let them try to figure it out themselves.
I've never liked this meme, and it's proven unpopular here before. You should always be able to back up statements with some kind of evidence, instead of just waving away people who actually want you to prove what you're saying is true.
Correct. This is intellectually dishonest and just boosters and justifies insecurity.
You make a claim, it's best to bring the source else it's just an opinion. Or at least point me in a direction, but don't be surprised if I end up drawing my own conclusion.
This is a casualty of a post truth world. Normies live in a very large bubble of media consensus cracking. Sources are deboonked and dismissed. It is easy to get discouraged. As another here said, normies don't want the truth. They will cling to and defend their comfortable lies.
Reasons I stopped trying to explain things. Too many expected to be spoon fed like some overgrown child instead of doing their due diligence and digging. When i began spending more time breaking things down to simple minds than doing more deep dives myself, I said fuckit.
AND they don't really want your info or really care about what it says. Most of the brainwashed actually LIKE what they believe....it fits in their view of the world. Nothing you're gonna say is going to change their mind anyway....
I understand we have newcomers, but the best way to get started is to pick the topic most important to you...and start digging.
This process helps anons to understand not only the nature of the problem, and possible solutions, but it also helps to flesh out the character of the players.
Then, as you gain in perspective, climbing toward the 40,000 foot view, you are able to discern hidden aspects of the war we are in.
You begin to suspect some small time players might be holding aces.
Hat colors begin to change.
Moves and countermoves going back generations come into focus.
I get & totally agree, but at the same time;
True genius is in making things SIMPLE.
Any idiot can spew jargon and years worth of complex research & ideas at another;
It takes true genius to make the complex, simple, for the normies & others who aren't as autistic as us....
Got downvoted for saying that when this was last posted…lol. Actually had someone tell me I needed to change my opinion (and that I was wrong) because “many” disagreed with it.
If you've spent 10 years on it, you should have at least a few sources for key points.
Ultimately, you're in a situation where you're being asked to serve as a teacher. But you're being asked to serve in that role by those who really have only learned one thing: that everyone lies. They've been told over and over to do your own research, think for yourself, use discernment. So, they do what is logical. They ask you for a source.
Welcome to how real science and real academia work. Yes, you have to cite your sources. They teach that to kids doing book reports in the third grade - or at least they did when I was in the third grade. I had to cite which encyclopedia or National Geographic or book I had referenced. It's not complicated.
I've written some of these replies. Some of it is esoteric and there really aren't good sources. When that's the case, I say so. If you're approximating from memory, say so. It's an internet forum. We do that. But do understand when someone wants to actually see a source. If you don't have one, admit it, or dig it up.
But remember, if you make the claim, it's up to you to supply the evidence of that claim's veracity. It's up to you to explain it in such a way that it convinces others. Otherwise, if you make a weak case, don't be surprised when people reject your answer and tell you you're full of it.
It is very helpful to be able to point to concise articles that summarize the key points and relevant evidence on any given topic, ideally with images, graphs, or even memes when appropriate. No one can do in-depth research on all the many complex subjects involved with making government policies. The anons should consider putting together such a site, or at least compiling a list of useful links to sources that do this on a variety of relevant topics.
And if you do have a great source that synthesizes a lot of the data, they will say it's debonked. No pleasing these people. Best to just let them try to figure it out themselves.
Their dogma binds and blinds them.
Or if you give them too long / big / too much data, they exclaim; "Well I don't have the time to read all that!"
Right.....exactly.....which is why you don't know shit & we're having this conversation.....
🤦♂️😑🤦♂️😑😐
Trump released a 14 page statement this week and some lazy anon wanted me to post a breakdown of it. :( ....complained when I wouldn't.
I suspect those types are not really 'anons'.
kek kek
unfortunately, at least 10% here fall into that category
I've never liked this meme, and it's proven unpopular here before. You should always be able to back up statements with some kind of evidence, instead of just waving away people who actually want you to prove what you're saying is true.
Correct. This is intellectually dishonest and just boosters and justifies insecurity.
You make a claim, it's best to bring the source else it's just an opinion. Or at least point me in a direction, but don't be surprised if I end up drawing my own conclusion.
This is a casualty of a post truth world. Normies live in a very large bubble of media consensus cracking. Sources are deboonked and dismissed. It is easy to get discouraged. As another here said, normies don't want the truth. They will cling to and defend their comfortable lies.
Good thing I don't have to prove it! ;)
Seriously though, can't search previous posts by image, but I distinctly remember this specific meme being shit on.
Ah, here you go, https://greatawakening.win/p/15JnBQ6GLF/sauce-sauce-sauce/c/
I would have, but the job had already been done for me!
just another bulk stealth account BQ
Reasons I stopped trying to explain things. Too many expected to be spoon fed like some overgrown child instead of doing their due diligence and digging. When i began spending more time breaking things down to simple minds than doing more deep dives myself, I said fuckit.
AND they don't really want your info or really care about what it says. Most of the brainwashed actually LIKE what they believe....it fits in their view of the world. Nothing you're gonna say is going to change their mind anyway....
Amen.
I understand we have newcomers, but the best way to get started is to pick the topic most important to you...and start digging.
This process helps anons to understand not only the nature of the problem, and possible solutions, but it also helps to flesh out the character of the players.
Then, as you gain in perspective, climbing toward the 40,000 foot view, you are able to discern hidden aspects of the war we are in.
You begin to suspect some small time players might be holding aces.
Hat colors begin to change.
Moves and countermoves going back generations come into focus.
So much more too...feel free to add to the list.
Making them do a GAW thesis?
I like the on a .gov website because anything else is a conspiracy site according to them.
I get & totally agree, but at the same time; True genius is in making things SIMPLE.
Any idiot can spew jargon and years worth of complex research & ideas at another; It takes true genius to make the complex, simple, for the normies & others who aren't as autistic as us....
I love this meme.
Got downvoted for saying that when this was last posted…lol. Actually had someone tell me I needed to change my opinion (and that I was wrong) because “many” disagreed with it.
Lol…ya, no.
If you've spent 10 years on it, you should have at least a few sources for key points.
Ultimately, you're in a situation where you're being asked to serve as a teacher. But you're being asked to serve in that role by those who really have only learned one thing: that everyone lies. They've been told over and over to do your own research, think for yourself, use discernment. So, they do what is logical. They ask you for a source.
Welcome to how real science and real academia work. Yes, you have to cite your sources. They teach that to kids doing book reports in the third grade - or at least they did when I was in the third grade. I had to cite which encyclopedia or National Geographic or book I had referenced. It's not complicated.
I've written some of these replies. Some of it is esoteric and there really aren't good sources. When that's the case, I say so. If you're approximating from memory, say so. It's an internet forum. We do that. But do understand when someone wants to actually see a source. If you don't have one, admit it, or dig it up.
But remember, if you make the claim, it's up to you to supply the evidence of that claim's veracity. It's up to you to explain it in such a way that it convinces others. Otherwise, if you make a weak case, don't be surprised when people reject your answer and tell you you're full of it.
It is very helpful to be able to point to concise articles that summarize the key points and relevant evidence on any given topic, ideally with images, graphs, or even memes when appropriate. No one can do in-depth research on all the many complex subjects involved with making government policies. The anons should consider putting together such a site, or at least compiling a list of useful links to sources that do this on a variety of relevant topics.