BS: Are facts shite?

Subject: BS: Are facts shite?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 08:03 PM

Just survived, (by the skin of my teeth),a small altercation with Teribus over debating styles,see (Blair on Channel 4).It has got me thinkin.
Teribus carries about his person,a large book of facts, which he uses to batter people into submission. Im sure most of you have suffered this unpleasant experience at some time or other.
Teribus believes that this book can cause him to win any argument, on any subject large or small. I on the other hand believe that these "facts" or statistics (grain quotas, unemployment figures,infant mortality rates ,(it goes on ad nauseum)have almost always been engineered by politicians of all persuasions, to shine as good a light as possible on their devious shenanigans.so when I write here I like to think for myself and let my own opinions come through, no matter how stupid they may seem to others.
I have always admired the effort and time which Teribus expends on creating his diatribes, even if they may be a bit pedantic at times.
Teribus of course thinks me a wooly minded wanker,butis not completely correct in that assumption,as I only become "Wooly minded" in the Scottish Blackface sheep shagging season....Any facts/opinions on debating styles would be very welcome....Ake
PS..funnily enough,Teribus is one of the strongest supporters of a war that was based on no facts at all,and entirely on the opinions of cretins...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 08:19 PM

There are Lies , Damn Lies , and Statistics !

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 08:26 PM

Figgers don't lie, but liars figger.

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 08:26 PM

Facts are only useful if ya can sort through 'em intelligently and find the central meanin' behind 'em. Otherwise, they are just a lot of noise, calculated to impress some poor bozo who ain't so sharp with words. Politicians use facts like a pitcher uses a bean ball, to knock over the opposition. They will use just those facts that seem to support whatever axe they got to grind, and ignore those that don't.

Remember, facts can be misinterpreted. You can use facts selectively to prove just about anything you want. Ask any sharp lawyer about that. Ask O.J.'s crumby lawyers about it.

In such a case of deliberate misuse of snippets of truth to support a dishonest position...yeah! Facts are "shite" ta use the British expression.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 08:52 PM

Since you asked, Ake-- I find it easier to sort the facts when posts have well spaced-out paragraph divisions. My eyes are too old and tired to wade through text that is hard to read.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 09:10 PM

Well sor..ee Miss Sue, takes me all my time to think up words ,never mind setting them down properly...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 09:14 PM

Akenaton, if you don't care enough about your argument to put it in a form that can be digested by your audience, you might as well not post an argument at all. Maybe it takes a little longer, but it's MUCH more effective.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 09:19 PM

No way, akenaton. He just makes it all up as he goes along. He sure had you fooled.

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 09:25 PM

Look Dave...I was trying to make a reasonably serious point ,maybe in a slightly humourous way.   My work does not involve the use of a typewriter,but a rather large and heavy hammer.

I thought the content might be more important than the presentation.
I have apologised to Sue for hurting her eyes,but as I am unaware of any physical impediment in your case ,you'll just have to like it or lump it...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 09:28 PM

That's right. I know for a fact that teribus uses an automated internet software program to compose his political essays within seconds. It will churn out a diatribe on any subject, riddled with facts of all kinds, made up on the spot and dredged at random from its extensive database. You can specify these parameters:

1. basic subject of debate
2. chosen bias (conservative, liberal, communist, redneck, Harvard professor, right wing talkshow host, religious leader, anarchist, or pothead)
3. number of paragraphs
4. degree of aggression and personal insult (moderate, average, or extreme)

The really cool thing about this is it saves so much time. In a mere few seconds teribus can overwhelm his debating opponents with a flood of verbiage that will waste hours of their time.

Thus he is winning!

I've used it back on him too, by the way, but I cannot reveal the address where it is found. It wouldn't be wise to do that. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 09:34 PM

Thats really interesting LH.
You are an absolute gold mine of helpfull information.
Do you think this programme would help me to write proper?..as i fear for Sues' eyes and Daves blood pressure...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 09:45 PM

Oh Ake, but it's easy-- just go back once it's composed, and as you prufried it, add in the extree line breaks!

See:

Thats really interesting LH.

You are an absolute gold mine of helpfull information.

Do you think this programme would help me to write proper?..as i fear for Sues' eyes and Daves blood pressure...

Ake

Took me no time atall.

~SUSAN

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 09:51 PM

I dont like it like that Sue




It looks funny as well as sounding ridiculous...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 10:13 PM

Are you on WebTV? Does it look different to you maybe than it does to me?













Or not? :~)

~SUSAN

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 10:25 PM

Night Night Susan:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 10:44 PM

'Night, ake. ;~*)

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 10:51 PM

Yo, Ake.... Don't worry 'bout nuthin'... OL' T-Bird ain't a bit scarey since about 90% of the time he's wrong on which side of an issue to defend... But that's what makes him T...

And it don't matter what he's arguin' wabout to him as long as he's arguin'... Hey, the worlds full of funny people and you gotta admit that T-zer is one of them...

And I know that he uses LH's secret weapon which just spews out paragraph afetr paragraph of meaningless possible facts and supositions but that's the way he argues...

But T, to his credit, will read yer stuff and throw just eniff of yer personal stuff into the mix to make you feel like, inspite of using the now-not-so-secret weapon, he's writing all that stuff...

...cept he ain't.

Who cares? I don't. I ignore the obvious T-crap and just saty on the points. He doesn't like yer points so he tries to change the debate closer to where he can let the "N-N-S-S" (Now-Not-So-Secret) weapon argue with you... I call him on this one all the time but, hey, he don't care...

Well, now that LH has deflocked T, ake, it should make it easier to debate with him. But keep in mind that the T-Bird will argue that that the sky is yellow and that the earth is flat so he doesn't particularly pick the correct (right, well yeah) side of issues...

BTW, as if I had to say this. This ol' hillbilly don't use the "N.N.S.S." weapon, thou I do know about it...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: freda underhill
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 10:57 PM

interesting.. people have commented to me that there are toooo many space between the lines in my posts. and no proper punctuation.

BUT what can you do?

you can please some of the catters all of the time, and all of the catters some of the time, the others you just throw statistics at and see what they do. and i have done a survey of the Cat - those people who use argument without resorting to long words, endless raves, paragraphs taken from computer packages or statistics are more fun, and so you're more likely to read to the end of the paragraph. (counts me out)

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 11:42 PM

This software won't make up your facts for you like Teribus' does, but it will format what you make up yourself into an organized debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 02 Jul 04 - 11:56 PM

But freda, your posts are always a pleasure, whatever the form! :~)

Well I have not read them ALL. But I bet I'm right! :~)

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Mudlark
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 12:14 AM

Freda...It's true that many relatively short paragraphs are much easier to read, but at the end of the day, content counts for a lot more than presentation. I'll wade thru your posts any day, well-spaced or not.

CarolC...very interesting sounding software but when I did the clicky I got

NOT FOUND
The requested URL /ask.css was not found on this server.
Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

Hmmm, not found to the 2nd power!

Akenaton...there is talking, discussing, arguing and debating, all interesting, stimulating exchanges of ideas. And then there is formal debating...which is often a sort of intellectual game, the only point of which is to win. Getting a computer program to win the game doesn't get one very far once off the computer, however. Maybe that's why Teribus enjoys Mudcat so much.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: mack/misophist
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 01:33 AM

You ask: "Are facts shite?". Well, some are and some aren't. It's up to you to check. Can't get around that if you want to argue.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Amos
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 02:09 AM

1. Facts are often thinly disguised opinions.
2. Facts are meaningless until they have been weighed for relative importance
3. Facts which are 1 but have not been weighed are just propaganda and rhetoric, and are of little merit.
4. Facts which have been verified as having occurred objectively, ands which have been weighed for importance are worth a great deal and are not shite..

Hope this helps.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: freda underhill
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 02:18 AM

thanks susan & mudlark - i guess what i was trying to say was obvious - different people like different things and receive info differently. this has inspired me to think about the cat and blither on about how i respond to it. depending on how burnt out or not i feel, sometimes i love reading the political posts, and get right into them. then i'll go for a while avoiding them, because i just don't want to think about it.

like you there are some catters whose comments i will always read (and yes, you guys, jennyo, ebbie, dianavan, sandra, jacqui and carolc fall there, and i guess some of those blokes..) and some whose comments i skip over. and i know there are some catters who will always be annoyed by my comments, its the law of nature. apart from the obvious - do i like that person and how do they think, a lot of it has got to do with sense of humour, how do you feel at the end of the day and what you can cope with taking in at the time.

akenaton i agree that sometimes people can be a pain, in that they think argue in a differnt way and for me sometimes it can be intolerable, depending on whether i'm having a bad hair day or not. so yes, i tend to skip over those people once identified. I have also turned around on a couple of people - once for someone whose posts upset me hugely, but then after a while i started to see the humour in them and now sort of like him, despite myself. then the other way for someone else whose posts i enjoyed a lot, until i saw him getting stuck into someone else whose posts i admire & enjoy, over a period of time, it sort of killed it for me and i no longer enjoy his stuff.

well, why rant on about this?

as the man said, because I could! and that's the joy of mudcat!

best wishes

freda

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: GUEST,Ellenpoly
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 05:35 AM

...And that's a fact!

;-D

..xx..e

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Pied Piper
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 07:27 AM

The Mudcat Mystics have an interesting technique they employ in there posts; just think of something and say it.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Bert
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 08:34 AM

Yup facts are funny things, that's why when Ake tell us he works with a heavy hammer it doesn't tell us too much.

What is heavy? for a jeweller a 2lb hammer is heavy, for a boilermaker a 7 or 14 lb hammer is kinda medium and a 28 lb hammer is heavy.

For a pile driver, I dunno, but those buggers are REALLY heavy.

So Ake, tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

What do you do for a living?

Or was the term hammer a euphemism and are you really a professional stud?

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 11:15 AM

I tried it just now, Mudlark, and I had no trouble getting in. But just in case I'm imagining it, here's the URL:

http://www.debatetools.com/

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Oaklet
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 11:57 AM

Interesting fact:

The British Sugar Corporation is now the UK's largest supplier of topsoil in the UK. They rinse the stuff of the sugar beet and now sell it instead of dumping it. Last year they supplied 50,000 tonnes of topsoil, 38% of which went to developers, under contract. The BSC's Hector Crump, head of its newly-formed Topsoil Division ejaculated: "The UK housing developer is a major market niche for our topsoil business as they are increasingly forced to develop more and more brownfield sites, where contaminated soil and sub-soil has to be removed. Replacing it with a by-product of the processing of such a staple foodstuff is a natural, logical step and we are going to make shit-loads of money of which I'll get some as me bonus."

Previously, the waste soil was stolen in the hems of the trousers of the workforce or sent to randomly selected addresses in Canada in Jiffy Bags.

According to Mr. Crump, "This bloody topsoil thing is money for old rope and I'm going to buy a Jag and a caravan".

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Cluin
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 12:26 PM

Not sure if facts are always shite, but shite is always a fact.

...a little life lesson there.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Mudlark
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 12:54 PM

Thanks for trying, Carol...I got the double negative w/that address as well...must be me.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 12:55 PM

Bert...Professional stud ....If only!!

I'd happily do that job for the "perks"...Dont tell Dolly mind...

In real life I'm a stonemason,and use hammers of various weights
John Henry was the pile driver....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: DougR
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 01:27 PM

Fact: the sun rises and sets each day, yet there are those here on the Mudcat that probably would argue that it does not.

I think the problem you folks have with Teribus is he DOES supply facts to support his arguments and you just don't want to accept that fact.

I REALLY think it is difficult to offer a reasonable argument against a fact (of course in Bobert's case a fact is a fact ONLY if the fact supports HIS argument) :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 01:36 PM

Except, DougR, that he gets caught fairly frequently with his "facts" down around his ankles. And he never has a good answer when that happens. At least not to me he doesn't. It's pretty easy to debunk most of Teribus' "facts". It only requires careful reading of his posts and a little research.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: GUEST,Wilfred
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 02:32 PM

Okay, let's see if we can find those people who will argue that the sun does not rise and set each day.















Well?













Don't be shy...













No takers?











Sorry, Doug R, looks like you struck out again. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: DMcG
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 02:42 PM

Well, to be accurate it only appears to rise and set each day ... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 02:46 PM

No, facts are not shite, they are facts. But sometimes, amid the smoke and mirrors, they can be quite rare.

On a couple of occasions some months back I took several of Teribus' posts and checked his "facts" point by point and found most of them to be either distorted or downright hot air (I did some fact checking myself to check out his facts). Out of maybe 1,200 words (in a single post) of "facts," a couple of them checked out, but the problem with them was that they were irrelevant to the point of the discussion. Apparently his tactic is to try to stun you with sheer volume, assuming that you will assume that what he is presenting as facts actually are facts and that you won't bother to check because the list is so long. After calling his bluff a couple of times and checking them out, I don't waste my time reading Teribus' posts anymore (I'm sure Doug will have something to say about that!). I can get more accurate facts (and often at least as relevant to the discussion) by reading the list of ingredients on a can of soup.

What puzzles me is:   1. Where does he get all the time to devote to this? Is he retired? Unemployed? Does he ever do anything else? Is he actually three people?   2. Why does he seem to care so much? What's he selling?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 04:05 PM

Well DougR didn't pick a very smart example there! According to Christopher North, some 200 years ago, the sun never set on "His Majesty's dominions."

Having had to apologise to Teribus a couple of times recently, I'm certainly beginning to see the case against facts (though I think it was him, not me, who was left "clutching at straws" in that infant-mortality wrangle you mentioned, Ake). But to be fair to the guy, his extraordinary marshalling of facts has given me pause for thought on quite a few occasions.

I'd always rank a good opinion ahead of a dubious fact of course - provided it comes clearly labelled as such, rather than masquerading as a fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: jacqui.c
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 04:06 PM

I have a friend who often tells me 'bullshit baffles brains'. He then proceeds to prove the case in debate. It's very easy for one person to use facts to prop up their point of view if the person with whom they are in debate does not have the facilty to prove or disprove those facts.

I agree that facts can be used selectively to back up any stance taken. Not all of us have the type of brain that retains those sort of figures or the time or inclination to research the particular
matter in question. I have now learned to admit that I do not have enough knowledge of the particular subject to argue the toss and change the subject.

There seems to be a need with that type of person to be able to show that they are right. It's a sort of control mechanism, maybe brought on by a basic insecurity in their own ability? My experience has shown that people like that are unable to admit that they don't know something about any subject raised, which is maybe why they have to resort to garnering facts from internet sites. I've found, for myself, that if I admit to little knowledge on a subject I will learn more in debate and that allows me to formulate my own opinions and not those of the person who is feeding the information onto the site.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 06:30 PM

Another thing I have noticed about the "fact freaks" is that they continuously refer to their opposing debater as "small," in stature,intelligence,even place of habitation,and invariably use terms like "Sonny","old son", "little mind", "little ideas",and living in a "little world".
jacqui c,said something interesting concerning an insecurity behind the writing of these people,and a obsessive need to prove themselves right.
I think she has a valid point.
I have always categorised people who use these terms, as patronising bullies ...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: GUEST, TheBigPinkLad
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 06:35 PM

The sun will always set if you add enough gelatin.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Jul 04 - 08:15 PM

if you have ever been involved in formal DEBATE, you know facts can be shite..*grin*...It never appealed to me, but an acquaintance was quite smug, back in college, for having slipped into a debate, (partly by the use of bright red suspenders..[braces]) the astounding 'fact'..."seven out of ten doctors leaves three!"....

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 04 Jul 04 - 04:11 AM

Interesting......

I don't know any of the parties involoved, but I suppose there is something a little bit sad about assembling a wadge of 'facts' to win an argument on Mudcat.

I do know that facts are sometimes very misleading. the Tories for example spent a hell of lot money on education. From experience however I know that most of the money was spent on crude social experimentation like the so-called national curriculum.

I was a supply teacher at the time and I saw the inside a lot of schools, and the important stuff like text books and repairs on school fabric all went to hell. I think most the money must have landed up in the pockets of middle class publishers who were publishing all these national curriculum directives and documents which arrived every day in the post. One English department had a entire room filled chest high with all this unread and largely unreadable crap.

I gather it was the same story in the health service where GPs where being induced to become fund holders against their better judgement.

You've got to try and assess the characters behind the statistics and their intentions.

Whatever you feel about Bush and Blair, I think surely their intentions towards Iraq are more benign than Saddam Hussein. Whether it was worth all the carnage - I think we have to just hope for the best.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: DougR
Date: 04 Jul 04 - 03:33 PM

Thanks, DMcG, for proving my point. :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jul 04 - 03:35 PM

any fact which will support your argument is valid:

any fact which might cast doubt upon your desired conclusion is invalid, and shite.


Just ask SRS.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Jul 04 - 03:45 PM

DougR, I think it's you who proved our point by submitting this proposition, "the sun rises and sets each day", as a "fact".

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: DMcG
Date: 04 Jul 04 - 03:55 PM

You're welcome, DougR :->

It was, of course, pure jest as I am sure you all realise. But were anyone to insist on being serious about it, there is some sort of point - the one single observed phenomenon can have lots of different interpretations depending on your point of view. Which interpretation you claim as the 'factual' one is at least as much to do with how you then use it than about its inherent features - i.e. its as much about 'you' as about 'it'.


(And, while we are thinking about 'the sun setting every day', what about from within the Artic circle? Anyone care to defend or counter the argument that it sets every day there?)

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jul 04 - 03:59 PM

by definition, it does- since the definition of a day is from sunset to sunset. But the days are not 24 hours. ( or even 23 hours 58 minutes...) . However, there are facts... one must indicate what the definitions and paramters are in order to evaluate them.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Jul 04 - 07:08 AM

Don Firth - 03 Jul 04 - 02:46 PM

"On a couple of occasions some months back I took several of Teribus' posts and checked his "facts" point by point and found most of them to be either distorted or downright hot air (I did some fact checking myself to check out his facts)."

You wish!! Dream on, Don - Dream on.

Oh, by the way, if one of those occasions, happened to be your PING and PONG, with respect to the preparedness of the US air defences on 9/11, I would refer you to evidence given to the 9/11 Commission.

Or maybe it was the DU ammunition thing, I'll refer you to the findings of the Royal Society's Report and conclusions.

Or maybe it was the US arsenal and inventory of Chemical/Biological Weapons. On that I will refer you to the undertaking by the US military to the US Congress to have all stockpiles of Chemical weapons and agents destroyed by 2007. In addition I would refer you to the fact that on at least three occasions on this forum I have requested information from any US ex-servicemen who post to this forum, and there are quite a few, to provide information relating to training they have received relating to the storage, handling, arming and deployment of US chemical/biological munitions - the response has been deafening in its silence, for one main reason. NATO (includes US and UK forces) abandoned the development and use of chemical and biological weapons over forty years ago - to my certain knowledge.

Are facts shite, of course they are Akenaton, especially when they are used to show what complete and utter rubbish you trot out at times.

As to Peter K (Fionn) and the clutching at straws thing. I believe that he first used the expression when I drew his attention to the fact that in its development under Dr. F. Castro, Cuba had been in receipt of subsidies from the USSR. His contention on that subject was that such subsidies had dried up years ago. I then pointed out to him that those subsidies had been in existence for 70% of the time that Fidel had been in power, so could therefore not be considered insignificant. On the infant mortality rate he compared one city in the US to Cuba's national figures, I responded by providing the national figures for both the USA and Cuba - they were comparable. Still don't see how I'm "clutching at straws" Peter K.

Subject: RE: BS: Are facts shite?
From: kendall
Date: 06 Jul 04 - 08:15 AM

Hey Terribus, is it possible that the reason you didn't get a response is simply that none of those weapons handlers are Mudcatters?