You the one out here promoting conspiracy theory without evidence then telling people to “do their own reading”. You determine truth by how it makes you feel, emotionally, rather than based on what we have evidence for or a lack of evidence for. That’s what children and under-developed adults do.
Its also why we’re here; its why I drug you down deep into the thread where people will have to click through multiple threads to see whats going on: most wont bother.
Conspiratorial thinking is an emotional response to uncertainty. We as people don’t like living with not knowing; we’re not wired for it. We’d rather an emotionally pleasurable story rather than uncertainty.
But its really just laziness. There is no actual excuse for it.
Well thats rude. And granted, while we all do die alone, at least until the end I’ll have my partner in marriage, my supportive community, and my extensive friend group to get me through.
having achieved nothing of note.
Don’t tell my co-authors that. They’d be very disappointed to find out that none of the many, and honestly, surprisingly well cited publications we’ve been able get out into the world aren’t worthy of note.
Mischaracterizing what I’m saying to be some broad generalization about conspiracies doesn’t change the fact that the behavior you are engaging in is truly sinister. You know you have no evidence to support the article you submitted and yet you continue anyways. This is the kind of breach of the social contract that MAGA and right-wingers use to excuse their toxic destruction of the ties which bind. And you are not different, although I think you could be better than you show yourself to be here.
I have drawn you as soyjack, therefore I am the victor:
I don’t believe you published anything any human has read. Nor do I believe you tricked someone into marriage. You don’t come off as smart, you come off as a bing bang character or the autistic kid at the grocery store telling me about spaceX.
Prove me wrong. Link something you wrote. I bet it woln’t have anything to do with cybersecurity… Because I don’t think you’ll link anything, because you have no value.
Now why would I be bothered by what a person who isn’t living in a fact based reality thinks about my career as an author?
What makes you think you are worthy of knowing anything about one as capable and important as myself, when you struggle with even the basic motion of knowing what evidence is and how to establish basic rigor around your thinking? You demonstrated repeatedly that you lack the competence to understand how fiction separates itself from reality already, so no amount of physical evidence is going to be compelling, at least until you fix your broken mind.
And honestly, I’m surprised you returned to this, but I guess that’s what triggered people do. Your clearly wrong about the thing we’re a taking about, so you try and make the conversation about something else.
Blah blah pomp, no proof you know shit about fuck. I’ve been skimming your bs for a while, no one else is going to read this far. Who are you talking to?
I’m getting bored but before I go I’ll be nice because I feel for ya. You need to learn to condense. You spend paragraphs saying what could fit in a sentence. I’m sure you’ve seen Monty Python. If you’re talking to someone and they seem increasingly annoyed as you explain details: GET TO THE POINT!
I gotz some shits to purple team. You let me know if you figure out some way to prove you know anything more than English. Skidiot.
You are, at the end of the day, a tragically broken person who clings to fantasy like it’s a safety blanket. You wrap yourself in these cheap little conspiracy scripts because it’s easier than doing the hard work of actually thinking. And that’s the core of it: it’s lazy. Weak. You don’t engage with facts, you don’t engage with rigor, you just pull the lever marked “mystery explanation” and out comes some recycled nonsense.
You know you’re in the wrong, but you persist anyway, because admitting that you’re just flailing at shadows would mean actually confronting the gaps in your own reasoning. And that takes effort. That takes discipline. Instead, you play make-believe and then act like you’ve scored points by announcing, for the fiftieth time, that “everything’s a cover-up.”
Stop spewing this drivel and maybe, just maybe, people wouldn’t have to waste their time walking you through the obvious. The only reason this conversation has gone this far is because you keep doubling down on nonsense instead of doing the grown-up thing: pausing, reflecting, and bringing some actual rigor to your thinking. Until then, you’ll stay exactly where you are now, stuck in the shallow end, paddling in circles, convinced you’ve discovered the ocean.
Just “pretending” to have an upper hand doesn’t give you that.
You the one out here promoting conspiracy theory without evidence then telling people to “do their own reading”. You determine truth by how it makes you feel, emotionally, rather than based on what we have evidence for or a lack of evidence for. That’s what children and under-developed adults do.
Its also why we’re here; its why I drug you down deep into the thread where people will have to click through multiple threads to see whats going on: most wont bother.
Conspiratorial thinking is an emotional response to uncertainty. We as people don’t like living with not knowing; we’re not wired for it. We’d rather an emotionally pleasurable story rather than uncertainty.
But its really just laziness. There is no actual excuse for it.
Life must be hard being so severely autistic. Pro tip, don’t repeat yourself like this IRL, it’s one of the reasons people avoid you.
I mean as long as I’m stopping conspiracy dribbling saboteurs to the social contract, I think I’ll be all right.
All conspiracies are false is as intellectually lazy as all conspiracies are true.
Also you’re going to die alone having achieved nothing of note.
Well thats rude. And granted, while we all do die alone, at least until the end I’ll have my partner in marriage, my supportive community, and my extensive friend group to get me through.
Don’t tell my co-authors that. They’d be very disappointed to find out that none of the many, and honestly, surprisingly well cited publications we’ve been able get out into the world aren’t worthy of note.
Mischaracterizing what I’m saying to be some broad generalization about conspiracies doesn’t change the fact that the behavior you are engaging in is truly sinister. You know you have no evidence to support the article you submitted and yet you continue anyways. This is the kind of breach of the social contract that MAGA and right-wingers use to excuse their toxic destruction of the ties which bind. And you are not different, although I think you could be better than you show yourself to be here.
I have drawn you as soyjack, therefore I am the victor:
I don’t believe you published anything any human has read. Nor do I believe you tricked someone into marriage. You don’t come off as smart, you come off as a bing bang character or the autistic kid at the grocery store telling me about spaceX.
Prove me wrong. Link something you wrote. I bet it woln’t have anything to do with cybersecurity… Because I don’t think you’ll link anything, because you have no value.
Now why would I be bothered by what a person who isn’t living in a fact based reality thinks about my career as an author?
What makes you think you are worthy of knowing anything about one as capable and important as myself, when you struggle with even the basic motion of knowing what evidence is and how to establish basic rigor around your thinking? You demonstrated repeatedly that you lack the competence to understand how fiction separates itself from reality already, so no amount of physical evidence is going to be compelling, at least until you fix your broken mind.
And honestly, I’m surprised you returned to this, but I guess that’s what triggered people do. Your clearly wrong about the thing we’re a taking about, so you try and make the conversation about something else.
Blah blah pomp, no proof you know shit about fuck. I’ve been skimming your bs for a while, no one else is going to read this far. Who are you talking to?
I’m getting bored but before I go I’ll be nice because I feel for ya. You need to learn to condense. You spend paragraphs saying what could fit in a sentence. I’m sure you’ve seen Monty Python. If you’re talking to someone and they seem increasingly annoyed as you explain details: GET TO THE POINT!
I gotz some shits to purple team. You let me know if you figure out some way to prove you know anything more than English. Skidiot.
You are, at the end of the day, a tragically broken person who clings to fantasy like it’s a safety blanket. You wrap yourself in these cheap little conspiracy scripts because it’s easier than doing the hard work of actually thinking. And that’s the core of it: it’s lazy. Weak. You don’t engage with facts, you don’t engage with rigor, you just pull the lever marked “mystery explanation” and out comes some recycled nonsense.
You know you’re in the wrong, but you persist anyway, because admitting that you’re just flailing at shadows would mean actually confronting the gaps in your own reasoning. And that takes effort. That takes discipline. Instead, you play make-believe and then act like you’ve scored points by announcing, for the fiftieth time, that “everything’s a cover-up.”
Stop spewing this drivel and maybe, just maybe, people wouldn’t have to waste their time walking you through the obvious. The only reason this conversation has gone this far is because you keep doubling down on nonsense instead of doing the grown-up thing: pausing, reflecting, and bringing some actual rigor to your thinking. Until then, you’ll stay exactly where you are now, stuck in the shallow end, paddling in circles, convinced you’ve discovered the ocean.
Just “pretending” to have an upper hand doesn’t give you that.