Originally Posted by Schifference
Reply With Quote
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
In my experience when someone sniffles they have a runny nose. His nose appears dry at all times.
Might be a ploy to instigate conversation like we are having. Who knows. Sounds like an inspiration to me.
He's done it on at least two other occasions I can think of off the top of my head. I was surprised to finally see it get traction last night. After the Orlando speech, I told both ds and Dh about how obnoxious it was and how impossible it is to watch his speeches with all the snorting going on. I voiced my exasperation last night right away because I knew it was going to be a distraction, yet again. His mannerisms are bad enough, but add the snorfling/suction thing in (sniffing just really doesn't quite cover that freakish breathing) and ugh...
We will be known forever by the tracks we leave. - Dakota
Go Forward With Courage
When you are in doubt, be still, and wait;
when doubt no longer exists for you, then go forward with courage.
So long as mists envelop you, be still;
be still until the sunlight pours through and dispels the mists
-- as it surely will.
Then act with courage.
Ponca Chief White Eagle
Looks real
Source: kennerly 11:33 AM - 24 Sep 2016
@kennerly: 1st Lady Michelle Obama hugs Pres. George W.Bush at opening of @NMAAHC I was there for 1 of museums chief sponsors @BankofAmerica https://twitter.com/kennerly/status/779750637366108161
From "kennerly's" twitter feed (and look at his other posts)
kennerly: Canon Explorer of Light, Pulitzer Prize winner, former chief White House photographer
https://twitter.com/kennerly
A blatant, in your face reminder that this absurd fake "division" b/w "left" and "right" is a circus act.
yep. ^this
I'm not a Trump supporter, but I absolutely hate Hillary. I really wanted to see Trump go after her and destroy her. But that debate performance by Trump was abysmal, I don't see how anybody can think he won. He couldn't string together a coherent argument the entire night. This was a presidential debate that he has had months to prepare for, and it looked like he was just making $#@! up as he goes.
Trump got stuck in a quagmire of his own ego and self importance instead of making the easiest attacks on an incredibly vulnerable and scandal prone opponent.
He began the debate solidly going on the offensive and making strong attacks against Hillary, but then as soon as they asked about his audit, he starting bumbling and rambling on and on. He was on the defensive for no reason the rest of the way. He would turn questions unrelated to anything having to do with his business record, to doing just that, endlessly defending his business record and his character. He had many opportunities to attack Hillary on the most obvious things, the e-mails, her terrible foreign policy record, questions of her health, and he just flat out fudged these attacks. I think he said maybe one to two lines about the e-mails and failed entirely to mention Benghazi and had maybe one other line about Hillary not being "tough" enough, which I assume was a reference to her health.
If his plan is the long game, fine, he did a great job of lowering just about everyone's expectations for round 2, and he could be on a path to peak by the end of round 3. If his plan was to nail Hillary on all of the big scandals and paint her as a lying fraud, he failed. Either way, it was just sad to see that this is what it has come to, one of these two people, will be the next President.
Pretty much my POV, as well.
There is no spoon.
pretty much my POV, also.
If they did have a deal with the moderator, and if they did fug with his mic... Should he be surprised? Would anybody be surprised by these kind of shenanigans?
No... Trump needs to pull up his pants, rub some dirt on his wounds and seriously prep up for the next one. And be prepared to let the sh!t fly - no holds barred.
If he actually wants to be the President, of course - which is debatable. Who in their right mind would want to be?
Trump having to debate both Hillary and lester Holt, threw him off his balance towards the end. I do not think anyone including Trump expected Holt to be the most biased moderator in the history of Presidential debates. I know it is NBC but in this case who would have thought Holt would tarnish all he has built for himself as a fair serious journalist.
That all went out the window last night. The left will take care of him for now until they are done with him but his place in history and his character will be forever sadly defined by his bias in last nights debate.
* See my visitor message area for caveats related to my posting history here.
* Also, I have effectively retired from all social media including posting here and are basically opting out of anything to do with national politics or this country on federal or state level and rather focusing locally. I may stop by from time to time to discuss philosophy on a general level related to Libertarian schools of thought and application in the real world.
Do you think he was more biased than Candy Crowley?
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
Lester did surpass Crowley in that respect. The difference here is with her it was expected considering she was known as a partisan hack and that the Republicans fear the race card so much they are reluctant to criticize Holt as much as they did with Crowley.
* See my visitor message area for caveats related to my posting history here.
* Also, I have effectively retired from all social media including posting here and are basically opting out of anything to do with national politics or this country on federal or state level and rather focusing locally. I may stop by from time to time to discuss philosophy on a general level related to Libertarian schools of thought and application in the real world.
Holt was definitely worse than Crowley. I was waiting for Holt to have a moment like that, after Matt Lauer was perceived to benefit Trump weeks earlier, and it did happen. They wanted to "even the playing field", but instead of simply using it as a single assist, akin to Crowley, they used this debate as an opportunity to go all in against him. Instead of stopping after the first time he helped out Hillary by questioning the validity of Trump's statement, he interrupted Trump multiple times, and asked many followup questions about Trump's character and scandals. I don't recall him doing the same with Hillary more than a single time. He also only hushed the crowd after Trump got an applause whereas Hillary got an applause minutes later and he said nothing. To be fair the crowd cheered many times afterwards for both candidates and he continued doing nothing, even after both the debate organizers and moderator stated no applause was allowed. No control over the debate.
The bias was obvious, but it really doesn't matter with Trump's lousy performance. Trump was going to be perceived as the loser with or without Holt. This had to happen after the Lauer debate, and I wouldn't be surprised if the pendulum swung back the other way in the upcoming debate.
Just Trump being Trump. He can't help himself.
Miss Piggy:
Miss Universe 'fat-shamed' by Donald Trump was accused of threatening to kill a judge and being an accomplice to a MURDER bid in her native Venezuela
Alicia Machado, from Venezuela, was Miss Universe in 1996 when Donald Trump bought the franchise for the contest
She was spoken about at Monday night debate by Hillary Clinton who told how Donald Trump had called her 'Miss Piggy' because of weight gain
But reports from the time have surfaced which reveal questions over her background in Venezuela
Court documents in 1998 revealed she was accused of driving her boyfriend from the scene of a murder attempt - at a woman's funeral
A judge also claimed on national television that she threatened his life
Unknown if Clinton campaign vetted Machado, 39, before debate and conference call with press on Tuesday which was almost all in Spanish
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4LX1Jbse9
Follow us: @MAIlOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Pfizer Macht Frei!
Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.
Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!
Short Income Tax Video
The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes
The Federalist Papers, No. 15:
Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.
^This! A thousand times this! How the hell can Hillary Clinton of all people talk about cyber security? Trump should have said "Well don't hire the people who set up your private email server to do the job and don't click on any more porn links" and the crowd would have gone wild! But no. Instead he talks about how the attack could have been some "400 pound hacker?" What the hell?
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
I agree with you that Lester Holt was incredibly biased. I disagree with you that Trump shouldn't have been expecting that. But yes. Holt's attack in the form of a question (Since you supported the Iraq war doesn't that mean your judgement is as bad as Hillary's?) was unfair. That said, why wasn't Trump prepared for that one? And Rand should have called Trump on it during the GOP debates. No place except on planet Trump could Trump saying "Yeah I guess so" to the question "Should we go into Iraq" square up with Trump's claim that "I was against the war from the beginning." Trump's comeback should have been "I gave a half hearted answer to a question from Howard Stern because it looked like we were going to war anyway and I didn't want the brave troops to think I didn't support them. But Hillary Clinton is the one who cheered on the war and voted for it. She's also the one who has cheered on the Al Qaeda linked rebels in Syria."
Seriously, I didn't once here Trump raise the point that the rebels Obama/Clinton/McCain are supporting in Syria are linked to Al Qaeda. Instead he went with the discredit and stupid republican view that ISIS came along because Obama pulled out early. Bull. Obama didn't pull out a day before Bush had negotiated us to pull out. According to Ted Cruz we stayed in Iraq too long! ISIS exists because we took out Qaddafi in Libya and we destablized Assad in Syria.
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
She is kinda chubby. I watched her on CNN last night. They only showed her from the neck up. It's funny that she kept saying "What happened 20 years ago doesn't matter" but then kept complaining about what Trump did 20 years ago. Strange.Miss Piggy:
Miss Universe 'fat-shamed' by Donald Trump was accused of threatening to kill a judge and being an accomplice to a MURDER bid in her native Venezuela
Alicia Machado, from Venezuela, was Miss Universe in 1996 when Donald Trump bought the franchise for the contest
She was spoken about at Monday night debate by Hillary Clinton who told how Donald Trump had called her 'Miss Piggy' because of weight gain
But reports from the time have surfaced which reveal questions over her background in Venezuela
Court documents in 1998 revealed she was accused of driving her boyfriend from the scene of a murder attempt - at a woman's funeral
A judge also claimed on national television that she threatened his life
Unknown if Clinton campaign vetted Machado, 39, before debate and conference call with press on Tuesday which was almost all in Spanish
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4LX1Jbse9
Follow us: @MAIlOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
I agree.
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
Did you know that when George Wallace first ran for governor he ran on a platform of racial harmony and inclusion? He got beat after his opponent was video taped riding around in a KKK car with a cross lit up in lightbulbs. George Wallace is quoted as saying "I got out n*ggered. I'll never be out n*ggered again." But George Wallace was a progressive his entire life.Strange bed fellows? Only to the...ahemmm....uninitiated. Strange to the appearance of the masses but decidedly unstrange when you know they all work together toward the same goal.
That's George Wallace on the right, the most vociferous of opponents to desegregation.
"Wallace was elected governor the first time in 1962, with what was the largest popular vote in state history and with the declaration: "I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say, segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."
This documentary, "Setting the Woods on Fire" explains the truth about George Wallace and what's really behind race politics in America.
It's interesting that Bill Clinton is in the picture. Bill Clinton, our supposed "first black president", said of the late senator Robert Byrd that his joining the KKK was just "what he had to do to get elected."
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
Damn you jmdrake, I am more than half way through that documentary and can't pull myself away.
There are some interesting historical parallels in terms of support but with Trump there is no racial discrimination factor with his polices. It is the media that has created the fairy tale that there is with Trump.
* See my visitor message area for caveats related to my posting history here.
* Also, I have effectively retired from all social media including posting here and are basically opting out of anything to do with national politics or this country on federal or state level and rather focusing locally. I may stop by from time to time to discuss philosophy on a general level related to Libertarian schools of thought and application in the real world.
Well, I can see from all the responses from my fellow RPF teammates that the sniffing was, in fact, noticed by some.
See, this is the risk of telling people what they saw, what they noticed, and what was obvious to them. My own ridiculous and arrogant statement was intentional -- my sense is that the arrogance of some of the rest of you is more sincere.
No, Phil, I am not joking. Did it seem funny? Did you think I was that poor a comedian?
No, Ender, I am not a parrot. Who, pray tell, would I be parroting? Some sort of anti-sniffing conspiracy theorists?
No, moostraks, I am not trying to "pin" the Great Sniffing Scandal (SCANDAL!!1!) on "any one agency". What the hey are you talking about?
And that's great, otherone, that is was so obvious. To you!
And that is the moral of my little demonstration here. Just because you see an event a certain way, it is natural to think that everyone cannot help but see it that way. To notice what you noticed. It was so obvious, after all! And so anyone with a differing point of view is clearly horrible, or dishonest, or boobish, or whatever other story you have to make up in your head about how they could come to such a wildly irrational conclusion after seeing the exact same thing you did, taking in the exact same data that you did.
Here's the secret: They didn't!
In 1990, a Stanford University graduate student illustrated this phenomenon by doing a scientific study. Participants played a simple game in which they were assigned to one of two roles: “tapper” or “listener.” Each tapper was asked to pick a well-known song, such as Happy Birthday to You, and tap out the rhythm on a table. The listener’s job was to guess the song.
Over the course of the experiment, 120 songs were tapped out. Listeners guessed only three of the songs correctly: a success ratio of 2.5%. But before they guessed, Newton asked the tappers to predict the probability that listeners would guess correctly. They predicted 50%. The tappers got their message across one time in 40, but they thought they would get it across one time in two. Why?
When a tapper taps, it is impossible for him to avoid hearing the tune playing along to his taps. Meanwhile, all the listener can hear is a kind of bizarre Morse code. Yet the tappers were flabbergasted by how hard the listeners had to work to pick up the tune.
The problem is that once we know something—say, the melody of a song—we find it hard to imagine not knowing it. Our knowledge has "cursed" us. We have difficulty sharing it with others, because we can’t readily re-create their state of mind. We have become locked in to our perception.
And so when the listeners you're sitting across from are sure that you're tapping out The Star-Spangled Banner, when of course the obvious truth is that you're tapping out Happy Birthday to You, well, there's only one explanation for that. They're stupider than you. Much, much stupider. Or they're being dishonest with themselves, or with you, or perhaps are just generally dishonest. Or they're experiencing cognitive dissonance. Or they don't understand the ideals The Star-Spangled Banner truly stands for. They hate liberty. Or they're Boobus Americanus. Or maybe they're out-and-out evil.
So this is a perfect example. I chose it because, presumably, no one actually has super-super strong feelings and emotions about whether someone was sniffing during the debate. Hopefully!
I hope that this truth is valuable to someone here. It has wide application and consequences. I hope that someone can soak it in and appreciate it. I just get tired, and sad, to read day after day so much bitterness, so much hate, so much negativity, here on this board from my RPF teammates. You hate so-and-so, and so you also hate all your fellow Americans who kind of like or support so-and-so. That second part is your mistake. They're all just loons and kooks and whatever other nasty thing you want to call them. No, no they're not. They are your fellow Americans. They are your teammates and your shipmates on this Great Ship America. They're pretty good people, many of them.
Last edited by helmuth_hubener; 09-28-2016 at 09:47 AM.
This is the response of a true RPF member. +1. Good day to you sir!Well, I can see from all the responses from my fellow RPF teammates that the sniffing was, in fact, noticed by some.
See, this is the risk of telling people what they saw, what they noticed, and what was obvious to them. My own ridiculous and arrogant statement was intentional -- my sense is that the arrogance of some of the rest of you is more sincere.
No, Phil, I am not joking. Did it seem funny? Did you think I was that poor a comedian?
No, Ender, I am not a parrot. Who, pray tell, would I be parroting? Some sort of anti-sniffing conspiracy theorists?
No, moostraks, I am not trying to "pin" the Great Sniffing Scandal (SCANDAL!!1!) on "any one agency". What the hey are you talking about?
And that's great, otherone, that is was so obvious. To you!
And that is the moral of my little demonstration here. Just because you see an event a certain way, it is natural to think that everyone cannot help but see it that way. To notice what you noticed. It was so obvious, after all! And so anyone with a differing point of view is clearly horrible, or dishonest, or boobish, or whatever other story you have to make up in your head about how they could come to such a wildly irrational conclusion after seeing the exact same thing you did, taking in the exact same data that you did.
Here's the secret: They didn't!
In 1990, a Stanford University graduate student illustrated this phenomenon by doing a scientific study. Participants played a simple game in which they were assigned to one of two roles: “tapper” or “listener.” Each tapper was asked to pick a well-known song, such as Happy Birthday to You, and tap out the rhythm on a table. The listener’s job was to guess the song.
Over the course of the experiment, 120 songs were tapped out. Listeners guessed only three of the songs correctly: a success ratio of 2.5%. But before they guessed, Newton asked the tappers to predict the probability that listeners would guess correctly. They predicted 50%. The tappers got their message across one time in 40, but they thought they would get it across one time in two. Why?
When a tapper taps, it is impossible for him to avoid hearing the tune playing along to his taps. Meanwhile, all the listener can hear is a kind of bizarre Morse code. Yet the tappers were flabbergasted by how hard the listeners had to work to pick up the tune.
The problem is that once we know something—say, the melody of a song—we find it hard to imagine not knowing it. Our knowledge has "cursed" us. We have difficulty sharing it with others, because we can’t readily re-create their state of mind. We have become locked in to our perception.
And so when the listeners you're sitting across from are sure that you're tapping out The Star-Spangled Banner, when of course the obvious truth is that you're tapping out Happy Birthday to You, well, there's only one explanation for that. They're stupider than you. Much, much stupider. Or they're being dishonest with themselves, or with you, or perhaps are just generally dishonest. Or they're experiencing cognitive dissonance. Or they don't understand the ideals The Star-Spangled Banner truly stands for. They hate liberty. Or they're Boobus Americanus. Or maybe they're out-and-out evil.
So this is a perfect example. I chose it because, presumably, no one actually has super-super strong feelings and emotions about whether someone was sniffing during the debate. Hopefully!
I hope that this truth is valuable to someone here. It has wide application and consequences. I hope that someone can soak it in and appreciate it. I just get tired, and sad, to read day after day so much bitterness, so much hate, so much negativity, here on this board from my RPF teammates. You hate so-and-so, and so you also hate all your fellow Americans who kind of like or support so-and-so. That second part is your mistake. They're all just loons and kooks and whatever other nasty thing you want to call them. No, no they're not. They are your fellow Americans. They are your teammates and your shipmates on this Great Ship America. They're pretty good people, many of them.
My POV is that you were the one that was hating on @moostraks and then me. You said that she and I did NOT hear the sniffs -when I had and so did moo. @phill4paul steps in over your remarks and you call that "hate".
BTW- I play the rhythm game with my music students all the time- they get so that they are pretty accurate on which song is being clapped. (We clap the rhythm.)
ETA: I tell my students that we have 2 ears and 1 mouth for a reason- better to listen twice as much than spouting one's mouth continually.
Last edited by Ender; 09-28-2016 at 09:58 AM.
There is no spoon.
Hate, hate, hate.
I thought, by the way, Ender, that you had! You wrote "YES MOO DID" and I thought you meant "YES YOU DID" as in, "Yes, Helmuth, you most certainly did notice that, you couldn't have missed it, you're just lying." And that the "MOO" was just a bizarre attempt to be funny and insult me somehow by calling me a cow.
You see how easy it is to misunderstand each other?
Where the "hate" comes in is exactly where I said it does: hate for the supporters of political candidates you dislike. That just seems unnecessary to me. It's draining. Even fellow RPF members, who have fought the fight of liberty shoulder-to-shoulder with you for years, heaven help them if they dare express anything that could be construed as sympathy towards one of the candidates: toss the heretic overboard! Evil! What a drain.
OK- my bad- I misunderstood you. Easy to do when we're writing, not talking.Hate, hate, hate.
I thought, by the way, Ender, that you had! You wrote "YES MOO DID" and I thought you meant "YES YOU DID" as in, "Yes, Helmuth, you most certainly did notice that, you couldn't have missed it, you're just lying." And that the "MOO" was just a bizarre attempt to be funny and insult me somehow by calling me a cow.
You see how easy it is to misunderstand each other?
Where the "hate" comes in is exactly where I said it does: hate for the supporters of political candidates you dislike. That just seems unnecessary to me. It's draining. Even fellow RPF members, who have fought the fight of liberty shoulder-to-shoulder with you for years, heaven help them if they dare express anything that could be construed as sympathy towards one of the candidates: toss the heretic overboard! Evil! What a drain.
And my experience on the forum has been one of being called names and thrown insults for months now, because I'm not a Trump supporter. I have have said many times that I support everyone's right to vote for whom they choose. I do NOT support the ridiculous insults that are piled on those who do not endorse Trump.
And, I don't hate anyone. Any derogatory remarks you see from me toward anyone is after mucho insults, innuendoes and name-calling of others.
My one big "fault", throughout my life, has been to come to the aid of the underdog. If someone is being piled on by haters, I'm going to defend them. Happened all the time as a kid- and I expect it will continue for all my life.
There is no spoon.
Looks real
Source: kennerly 11:33 AM - 24 Sep 2016
@kennerly: 1st Lady Michelle Obama hugs Pres. George W.Bush at opening of @NMAAHC I was there for 1 of museums chief sponsors @BankofAmerica https://twitter.com/kennerly/status/779750637366108161
From "kennerly's" twitter feed (and look at his other posts)
kennerly: Canon Explorer of Light, Pulitzer Prize winner, former chief White House photographer
https://twitter.com/kennerly
A blatant, in your face reminder that this absurd fake "division" b/w "left" and "right" is a circus act.
I stand corrected.
I get your rant but piss poor attempt at proving your point. I was surprised it finally became noticed because he's done this behavior previously without much notice. I attributed the recognition to the diversity and number of people watching this time. As for my position about the agency, if you care at all to know, it was a short cut to a rebuttal I've seen regarding how the mic was being sabotaged. I was avoiding any further misperceptions of what you were already attempting to be dismissive of as my experience because, honestly, my initial reaction when I saw it after Orlando was someone possibly messing with his mic. I just have no idea how it could be done as it is right before he speaks and sooo pronounced.Well, I can see from all the responses from my fellow RPF teammates that the sniffing was, in fact, noticed by some.
See, this is the risk of telling people what they saw, what they noticed, and what was obvious to them. My own ridiculous and arrogant statement was intentional -- my sense is that the arrogance of some of the rest of you is more sincere.
No, Phil, I am not joking. Did it seem funny? Did you think I was that poor a comedian?
No, Ender, I am not a parrot. Who, pray tell, would I be parroting? Some sort of anti-sniffing conspiracy theorists?
No, moostraks, I am not trying to "pin" the Great Sniffing Scandal (SCANDAL!!1!) on "any one agency". What the hey are you talking about?
And that's great, otherone, that is was so obvious. To you!
And that is the moral of my little demonstration here. Just because you see an event a certain way, it is natural to think that everyone cannot help but see it that way. To notice what you noticed. It was so obvious, after all! And so anyone with a differing point of view is clearly horrible, or dishonest, or boobish, or whatever other story you have to make up in your head about how they could come to such a wildly irrational conclusion after seeing the exact same thing you did, taking in the exact same data that you did.
Here's the secret: They didn't!
In 1990, a Stanford University graduate student illustrated this phenomenon by doing a scientific study. Participants played a simple game in which they were assigned to one of two roles: “tapper” or “listener.” Each tapper was asked to pick a well-known song, such as Happy Birthday to You, and tap out the rhythm on a table. The listener’s job was to guess the song.
Over the course of the experiment, 120 songs were tapped out. Listeners guessed only three of the songs correctly: a success ratio of 2.5%. But before they guessed, Newton asked the tappers to predict the probability that listeners would guess correctly. They predicted 50%. The tappers got their message across one time in 40, but they thought they would get it across one time in two. Why?
When a tapper taps, it is impossible for him to avoid hearing the tune playing along to his taps. Meanwhile, all the listener can hear is a kind of bizarre Morse code. Yet the tappers were flabbergasted by how hard the listeners had to work to pick up the tune.
The problem is that once we know something—say, the melody of a song—we find it hard to imagine not knowing it. Our knowledge has "cursed" us. We have difficulty sharing it with others, because we can’t readily re-create their state of mind. We have become locked in to our perception.
And so when the listeners you're sitting across from are sure that you're tapping out The Star-Spangled Banner, when of course the obvious truth is that you're tapping out Happy Birthday to You, well, there's only one explanation for that. They're stupider than you. Much, much stupider. Or they're being dishonest with themselves, or with you, or perhaps are just generally dishonest. Or they're experiencing cognitive dissonance. Or they don't understand the ideals The Star-Spangled Banner truly stands for. They hate liberty. Or they're Boobus Americanus. Or maybe they're out-and-out evil.
So this is a perfect example. I chose it because, presumably, no one actually has super-super strong feelings and emotions about whether someone was sniffing during the debate. Hopefully!
I hope that this truth is valuable to someone here. It has wide application and consequences. I hope that someone can soak it in and appreciate it. I just get tired, and sad, to read day after day so much bitterness, so much hate, so much negativity, here on this board from my RPF teammates. You hate so-and-so, and so you also hate all your fellow Americans who kind of like or support so-and-so. That second part is your mistake. They're all just loons and kooks and whatever other nasty thing you want to call them. No, no they're not. They are your fellow Americans. They are your teammates and your shipmates on this Great Ship America. They're pretty good people, many of them.
Anywho, to the rest of your rant, some are working to put in place candidates not supported by the forum and heaping tons of erroneous statements to which you have pushback occurring. We won't just all get along and Ron Paul is no longer a point of cohesiveness. In many ways I regret my support of RP which has led to what we have today. It is a kick in the teeth to realize what has been used to create the movement that is Trump.
This "great ship America" is not at all within some cohesive vision that everyone agrees upon here and "they're pretty good people, many of them" is an appeal to ignore the ugliness which is driving the intensity of opinions being espoused. If you are so tired of the hate, take a break. I'm guessing it ain't gonna get better any time soon.
We will be known forever by the tracks we leave. - Dakota
Go Forward With Courage
When you are in doubt, be still, and wait;
when doubt no longer exists for you, then go forward with courage.
So long as mists envelop you, be still;
be still until the sunlight pours through and dispels the mists
-- as it surely will.
Then act with courage.
Ponca Chief White Eagle
So, I'm curious, if you wanted to have a loving environment where your ideals for the society you wish to live in are embraced, would you be loving and tolerant of those who are actively working against your interests? Or would you speak up and educate those who are attempting to force you to pay for a society you do NOT want to live in? Would you attend your neighborhood association meetings if they were zoning you out and still forcing you to pay your member fees? Would you sit passively by in those meetings and allow the other members to work against your interests, especially as the become progressively toxic to you?Hate, hate, hate.
I thought, by the way, Ender, that you had! You wrote "YES MOO DID" and I thought you meant "YES YOU DID" as in, "Yes, Helmuth, you most certainly did notice that, you couldn't have missed it, you're just lying." And that the "MOO" was just a bizarre attempt to be funny and insult me somehow by calling me a cow.
You see how easy it is to misunderstand each other?
Where the "hate" comes in is exactly where I said it does: hate for the supporters of political candidates you dislike. That just seems unnecessary to me. It's draining. Even fellow RPF members, who have fought the fight of liberty shoulder-to-shoulder with you for years, heaven help them if they dare express anything that could be construed as sympathy towards one of the candidates: toss the heretic overboard! Evil! What a drain.
We will be known forever by the tracks we leave. - Dakota
Go Forward With Courage
When you are in doubt, be still, and wait;
when doubt no longer exists for you, then go forward with courage.
So long as mists envelop you, be still;
be still until the sunlight pours through and dispels the mists
-- as it surely will.
Then act with courage.
Ponca Chief White Eagle
Posting Permissions
Connect With Us