What is?

[ThxOne Premium Member]

So you think that it's a far-left conspiracy theory. unless you don't accept what your mind is analyzing it as.
If I say "that SOUNDS like a woodpecker on a tree", I don't deny my analysis and say "but I'm sure it's actually a chipmunk 50 feet up, banging its head hard and fast".

So to you, the facts of the matter "sounds like far-left conspiracy theory", but you fully believe the facts and that Trump did exactly what I have stated.

If you don't trust your own belief that it's just a "far-left conspiracy theory" that Trump covered up and admitting covering up what was going on, why would you express the sentiment? That's just odd.
Perhaps schizophrenic, I dunno.
Maybe just keep your internal mental struggle internal to be consistent here.

Who are you trying to convince. I said it sounds like and if you want more context I typed it with a raised brow of suspicion. Literally and did so because of the way you worded your post. I think you are far left and biased so your post are laced to hell and back with your biased views. Deny it all you want.

But back on track with the documents discussion:
Can you explain the high security measures employed in protecting the documents Trump had?
Can you explain why you think Trumps refusal to cooperate is the same as Biden's immediate notification that he had the documents and turning them over immediately when found?

Yes. Trump had/has far more security than Biden.

Yes. Biden turned his over because he.... his puppet masters didn't want to come off as hypocritical... too late.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Nah, I'll bite.

Your claim that I am wrong doesn't make me wrong.

That's why I don't just make claims. I provide evidence, facts, proof, verifications to back them up.
For example, I'll provide medical texts, photos, diagrams, etc.
And then you just say "those are wrong", even when you have provided the same info that is contrary to your claims.

You are the one using the word "in" ambiguously. I am using it LITERALLY.

It's been pointed out probably dozens of times that you are actually misusing the word in your attempt to be right in your claim that bones do not have nerves in them. The word "innervation" is what medical science calls nerves being "in" bone.
You tried to spin it to "in" somehow meaning "passing through" which is simply incorrect. Just like a square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not a square, something that is "passing through" can be "in" but "in" is not defined as "passing through".

The same thing you are doing about the classified documents... downplaying it because Biden did it.

Tell me exactly what I am "downplaying" when I state the facts of the situation, and compare and contrast them.
YOU are the one who is arguing on behalf of Trump, by makin false claims such as the documents he had were "secured", when there si photographic evidence to the contrary.

I gave you ACTUAL prices of specific beef. YOU decided on your own to change my parameters so you could save face and continue to argue.

Also incorrect. You simply said "beef", I then compared the same type of beef in past prices versus current prices. An apples-to apples comparison. After much back-and-forth, you decided to tell us you were complaining about Angus beef. When I then did a comparison of Angus prices in the past to the present, you basically said it was all a lie.
You are wont to do such things instead of discussing facts, especially when you have been proved wrong WITH facts.

It is all alleged until proved in court.

No. When someone PLUS their attorney admits to them doing something, it is not an "allegation".
An allegation is a claim made by a 2nd party about what someone has done. You don't make "allegations" about yourself. You can make a claim, but then you must prove the claim for it to be believed.
And let's not forget he returned SOME documents, which 100% verifies it's not an "allegation" that he had them.

I don't like people because I am told to do so. If that is what you do that's on you.

Why do you dislike people because you are told to do so?
Wouldn't you rather make your own decisions with critical thinking and due diligence? That's what I choose to do.

And if the mods are reading this, I think that instead of simple back-forth sniping, we are having an actual conversation here. But conversing in snippets eats up snippets rather quickly.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Thx got locked down, but I think he wanted this to be posted here instead of sending it to me personally.
I'll respond to him publicly so a dialogue remains xthat others can keep up with if they wish.
My answers are in bold letters.

19 minutes ago

That's why I don't just make claims. I provide evidence, facts, proof, verifications to back them up.
For example, I'll provide medical texts, photos, diagrams, etc.
And then you just say "those are wrong", even when you have provided the same info that is contrary to your claims.

Whatever helps you sleep.
I actually get very little sleep, but it has nothing to do with this stuff. I'm a facts and figures kind of guy. You may dislike that and prefer your beliefs-based processing style, but I am how I am.

It's been pointed out probably dozens of times that you are actually misusing the word in your attempt to be right in your claim that bones do not have nerves in them. The word "innervation" is what medical science calls nerves being "in" bone.
You tried to spin it to "in" somehow meaning "passing through" which is simply incorrect. Just like a square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not a square, something that is "passing through" can be "in" but "in" is not defined as "passing through".

It's not a spin the innervated nerves are terminating to the layer covering the bone. The nerves are not IN the bone even if the layer covering the bone is passing through openings in the bone. Please STFU.
This is precisely where conversation goes south. You refuse to accept fact contrary to your beliefs. The word "innervated" literally begins with the word "in", lol.
And then you continue to deflect by claiming the nerves terminate at the surface of the bone, even after YOU posted a picture that shows nerves INSIDE the bone.
It's just odd.

Tell me exactly what I am "downplaying" when I state the facts of the situation, and compare and contrast them.
YOU are the one who is arguing on behalf of Trump, by makin false claims such as the documents he had were "secured", when there si photographic evidence to the contrary.

They were secured. Please tell me your photo of boxes is not your proof.
Trump allowed to take...
Biden not allowed to take.
Explain that.
You repeat the claim, in complete contradiction of the photo evidence, and Trump's own admittal of the FACT that he had the docs. Please, provide more than "I said so" as your proof the docs were "secured" at Mara Lago. Keep the conversation going.
Actually, maybe YOU should explain why "Trump alllowed to take..>Biden not allowed to take"

Also incorrect. You simply said "beef", I then compared the same type of beef in past prices versus current prices. An apples-to apples comparison. After much back-and-forth, you decided to tell us you were complaining about Angus beef. When I then did a comparison of Angus prices in the past to the present, you basically said it was all a lie.
You are wont to do such things instead of discussing facts, especially when you have been proved wrong WITH facts.

You don't get to decided what I am talking about. Furthermore I posted prices and photo's from the store I shop at proving what I said to be true and you still tried to call me a liar. So again, STFU.

YOU decided that you wanted to talk Angus beef after the discussion was about plain ground, so I shifted the discussion to be about Angus beef b/c you like it better.
You indeed posted a flyer from those stores, and then I found historical info from those stores, regarding the same product.
I think an apples-to-apples (or Angus-to-Angus) is the type of comparison that should be made when talking about current versus historical prices, don't you?

I'm confused about the "STFU", as you are the guy who has complained MANY times in the past about "conversation", or lack thereof. I hope you don't think "conversation" is you posting your claims, beliefs, etc, and then those must just be accepted because you made them.
That would be more like "oratory" than conversation. Not much fun.

No. When someone PLUS their attorney admits to them doing something, it is not an "allegation".
An allegation is a claim made by a 2nd party about what someone has done. You don't make "allegations" about yourself. You can make a claim, but then you must prove the claim for it to be believed.
And let's not forget he returned SOME documents, which 100% verifies it's not an "allegation" that he had them.

Were they sworn when they made these statements? No... then alleged.
No. Once again, you can't make an allegation about yourself. If you admit to something, you are making a claim, not an allegation. Trump admitted having the docs and the docs were retrieved from him. This is not "allegation".

Why do you dislike people because you are told to do so?
Wouldn't you rather make your own decisions with critical thinking and due diligence? That's what I choose to do.

Stop, Rob, just stop. You're a follower and it's obvious. I like who I like if they are worth liking. I make my own choices. Stop acting like you do as well.
Keep the dialogue going. Explain why YOU choose to dislike whoever (whomever?) you are told to, and why you think it's bad I make my decisions based on facts and evidence, due diligence and critical thinking.
I do so because it's the empirical method, and it has worked real well for centuries before I existed. Whereas, acting based on beliefs or the commands of others has not.

And if the mods are reading this, I think that instead of simple back-forth sniping, we are having an actual conversation here. But conversing in snippets eats up snippets rather quickly.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Have you noticed how you often go off on these weird tangents instead of speaking to the subject at hand? You are especially adept at doing it when you've been proved wrong about something.

Instead of admitting you are wrong about nerves in bones, you go off on some nonsense about how medical science doesn't understand the meaning of the word "in".

Which begs the question why engage? Seriously, how often does the conversation devolve into some sort of exercise in linguistics? 99.99% of the time. When it's impossible to actually discuss the issue at hand, then you're better off just checking out (IMHO).

Somebody who is willing to equate Biden's (and Pence and every other POTUS in recent memory) possession of classified docs to Trump clearly attempting to illegally retain possession of classified docs is either intellectually dishonest, deluded by their political beliefs or they're just arguing to argue. The same goes for any number of issues: SPR, inflation, etc.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Actually I was wondering why you and Rob don't just have private conversation with each other.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Which begs the question why engage? Seriously, how often does the conversation devolve into some sort of exercise in linguistics? 99.99% of the time. When it's impossible to actually discuss the issue at hand, then you're better off just checking out (IMHO).

Somebody who is willing to equate Biden's (and Pence and every other POTUS in recent memory) possession of classified docs to Trump clearly attempting to illegally retain possession of classified docs is either intellectually dishonest, deluded by their political beliefs or they're just arguing to argue. The same goes for any number of issues: SPR, inflation, etc.

I'm no philosopher, but I do enjoy a good or even spirited/heated debate. It pushes me to think and to learn new things in order to be able to contribute. When I read about things with interest, I am far more likely to retain the information, understand it, and be able to hold it and use it in the future.

It's a bummer though, that people get so emotionally involved and don't bother to debate with facts and information but choose instead to just declare their belief as the irrefutable fact. And to do so even when the proof they are wrong is on the screen directly in front of them, and readily available through more sources than any of us could have imagined when we were in grade school or even high school.
Maybe they even offer to punch you in the face when you prove them wrong. That's a fun one.

On a tangent, I actually don't envy teachers these days, with the almost unlimited ways kids can cheat the system. Having an AI do my homework for me in HS or university would have been a godsend. But instead of learning how to research, think critically, compose a sentence or 400, I would have been learning how AI works.

Maybe that's how technology goes: Instead of doing math on paper, you learn how to use an abacus. Then someone creates another "math machine", and people learn how to use it. Eventually no one can do it "long form". Seems like a bad thing, but IS it?
Throughout history, the "long form" way has been abandoned on plenty of daily-life things. How many people are crying that no one knows how to use a horse and buggy, or that you can fire up a gas oven, and very few houses have wood-fired cooking appliances?

One of the current memes has to do with knowing how to drive a stick. The reality is that an auto transmission used to be a luxury that you paid extra for. Now it's so commonplace, the need to know how to drive a stick is virtually gone. So congrats boomer; you can drive a stick shift. the new generation is smart enough to not to HAVE to.

Actually I was wondering why you and Rob don't just have private conversation with each other.

It's an open forum where we can all talk in/to the group. Private conversations also exist, as you well know.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

Nah, this is how technology goes:

"Biosensors-based devices are transforming medical diagnosis of diseases and monitoring of patient signals. The development of smart and automated molecular diagnostic tools equipped with biomedical big data analysis, cloud computing and medical artificial intelligence can be an ideal approach for the detection and monitoring of diseases, precise therapy, and storage of data over the cloud for supportive decisions. This review focused on the use of machine learning approaches for the development of futuristic CRISPR-biosensors based on microchips and the use of Internet of Things for wireless transmission of signals over the cloud for support decision making. The present review also discussed the discovery of CRISPR, its usage as a gene editing tool, and the CRISPR-based biosensors with high sensitivity of Attomolar (10−18M), Femtomolar (10−15M) and Picomolar (10−12M) in comparison to conventional biosensors with sensitivity of nanomolar 10−9M and micromolar 10−3M. Additionally, the review also outlines limitations and open research issues in the current state of CRISPR-based biosensing applications."

Futuristic CRISPR-based biosensing in the cloud and internet of things era: an overview - Multimedia Tools and Applications

Biosensors-based devices are transforming medical diagnosis of diseases and monitoring of patient signals. The development of smart and automated molecular diagnostic tools equipped with biomedical big data analysis, cloud computing and medical artificial intelligence can be an ideal approach...

link.springer.com

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

It's an open forum where we can all talk in/to the group. Private conversations also exist, as you well know.

Yes but then when others respond with their opinions you do what you do. You have claimed that I ignore facts and blah blah blah just so I can be heard and that I don't actually have a conversation. So what is it that you are doing? You know, when you post stuff then when people respond you try to shut them down with every fiber of your being then site facts as the reason for the way you act. Just curious.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Nah, this is how technology goes:

"Biosensors-based devices are transforming medical diagnosis of diseases and monitoring of patient signals. The development of smart and automated molecular diagnostic tools equipped with biomedical big data analysis, cloud computing and medical artificial intelligence can be an ideal approach for the detection and monitoring of diseases, precise therapy, and storage of data over the cloud for supportive decisions. This review focused on the use of machine learning approaches for the development of futuristic CRISPR-biosensors based on microchips and the use of Internet of Things for wireless transmission of signals over the cloud for support decision making. The present review also discussed the discovery of CRISPR, its usage as a gene editing tool, and the CRISPR-based biosensors with high sensitivity of Attomolar (10−18M), Femtomolar (10−15M) and Picomolar (10−12M) in comparison to conventional biosensors with sensitivity of nanomolar 10−9M and micromolar 10−3M. Additionally, the review also outlines limitations and open research issues in the current state of CRISPR-based biosensing applications."

Futuristic CRISPR-based biosensing in the cloud and internet of things era: an overview - Multimedia Tools and Applications

Biosensors-based devices are transforming medical diagnosis of diseases and monitoring of patient signals. The development of smart and automated molecular diagnostic tools equipped with biomedical big data analysis, cloud computing and medical artificial intelligence can be an ideal approach...

link.springer.com

How is that different? We are using technology to do things in different, better, more efficient ways.
When in hospital, they would check your vitals at intervals, potentially missing things. Now they can monitor them 24/7 and be alerted the moment there is a problem, or go back and review history.

Bad stuff?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

From the WHO.

"Globally, the number of new cases increased by 4% during the 28-day period of 11 December 2023 to 7 January 2024 as compared to the previous 28-day period, with over 1.1 million new cases. The number of new deaths decreased by 26% as compared to the previous 28-day period, with 8700 new fatalities reported. As of 7 January 2024, over 774 million confirmed cases and over seven million deaths have been reported globally."

So weaker virus causing less death or this miracle vaccine they have to keep adjusting and updating?

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Yes but then when others respond with their opinions you do what you do. You have claimed that I ignore facts and blah blah blah just so I can be heard and that I don't actually have a conversation. So what is it that you are doing? You know, when you post stuff then when people respond you try to shut them down with every fiber of your being then site facts as the reason for the way you act. Just curious.

When I do "what I do", which is not accept someone's lies on this forum, or accept their demands that their personal beliefs on a subject carry more weight than centuries of proved facts, why is that a bad thing?

You have claimed in the past that you accept nothing that others say and "question", and you "think outside the box", and however else you describe it.
Yet, you want to post nonsense here and then have us all just accept it without question and without thinking outside of the "box" YOU have created? That's incredibly disingenuous.

When someone posts BS, I (and others here) are not afraid to point it out as BS, and be able to support our side of the argument. I do it b/c I have never been afraid to call BS on BS. (Underlined in case you want to again falsely claim I never answer your question)

Which do you consider more "wrong": For someone to post a lie (either their own or someone else's), or for someone to call BS on that lie?

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

How is that different? We are using technology to do things in different, better, more efficient ways.
When in hospital, they would check your vitals at intervals, potentially missing things. Now they can monitor them 24/7 and be alerted the moment there is a problem, or go back and review history.

Bad stuff?

All technology becomes weaponized. We have nuclear technology, and we blew people up with it. All technology is weaponized by people in power and used against us, and they don't care about me or you.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

When I do "what I do", which is not accept someone's lies on this forum, or accept their demands that their personal beliefs on a subject carry more weight than centuries of proved facts, why is that a bad thing?

You have claimed in the past that you accept nothing that others say and "question", and you "think outside the box", and however else you describe it.
Yet, you want to post nonsense here and then have us all just accept it without question and without thinking outside of the "box" YOU have created? That's incredibly disingenuous.

When someone posts BS, I (and others here) are not afraid to point it out as BS, and be able to support our side of the argument. I do it b/c I have never been afraid to call BS on BS. (Underlined in case you want to again falsely claim I never answer your question)

Which do you consider more "wrong": For someone to post a lie (either their own or someone else's), or for someone to call BS on that lie?

Ok who do you think you are to just assume everything is B.S. or a lie???

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

From the WHO.

"Globally, the number of new cases increased by 4% during the 28-day period of 11 December 2023 to 7 January 2024 as compared to the previous 28-day period, with over 1.1 million new cases. The number of new deaths decreased by 26% as compared to the previous 28-day period, with 8700 new fatalities reported. As of 7 January 2024, over 774 million confirmed cases and over seven million deaths have been reported globally."

So weaker virus causing less death or this miracle vaccine they have to keep adjusting and updating?

That information doesn't answer your question any more than simply giving car accident death stats tells us whether it's seatbelts or better tires that reduced deaths.

Look for the study that analyzes the components needed to know if it's the vax, the change in the virus, or both.