You can't threaten to shoot people, and you can't make stuff up.

That pretty well destroys every Republican campaign for the last 30 years.

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Saturday, April 3rd, 2010 10:16am PDT - promote requested by burdturgler.

Wow, I know that British libel law is pretty crap, but if in the US you can't even use libel to fight the most outrageous lies that cause the downfall of organisations, I'm wondering what's worse.

The ex-president of ACORN could probably bring a successful libel suit against O'Keefe in the US.

so... angry... >.<

When Maddow refers to the completely neutral and disinterested California attorney general Jerry Brown, is she referring to prominent liberal activist and former "Governor Moonbeam" Jerry Brown? No, he's not liberal at all. A+ detective work, Maddow. It's not like it's your job to know these things.

What an outrage that the fake-pimp refuses to release his raw footage, lest it give ammunition to his opponents... Maddow must be similarly outraged that liberal scientists like those in this video refuse to release their raw data, lest it give ammunition to their opponents. A+ job as a self-reflective intellectual, Maddow.

I understand human intelligence naturally falls along a bell curve, and you can't blame people for existing within that bell curve, but Maddow is a former Rhodes scholar who lives in the lap of luxury... she could at least try to exhibit complex cognition beyond primitive tribalism.

@chilaxe, do you contest Jerry Brown's account of the facts purely on the basis of his political ideology?

Think this through for a second: he's not making a subjective claim, he's reporting objective facts, facts which essentially are just a description of what O'Keefe's own tapes have on them. If he's lying, O'Keefe can get him into mountains of trouble by releasing the tapes and showing Brown to be lying about what he saw, not to mention validating the reputation of everyone who hopped onto the story and reported it as fact, and making the destruction of ACORN seem truly righteous.

>> ^chilaxe:
Maddow must be similarly outraged that liberal scientists like those in this video refuse to release their raw data, lest it give ammunition to their opponents.

I think there's more raw data available from climate research than one person can go through in a year. The "controversy" was about them making the different kinds of data fit their model, which can be a bit complex when different methods can be unreliable for some periods of time etc.

Although I'm pretty sure this won't change your opinion one bit. Goddamn republicans...

Hi @NetRunner.

What is Brown & Maddow's claim, exactly? That 1. no ACORN staff behaved inappropriately, or that 2. O'Keefe is only showing the bad parts (cherry-picking) and using editing to make them look even worse? I think (I could be wrong) Brown & Maddow are technically making the latter claim, but they think they're making the former claim. The latter claim doesn't seem extraordinary and would generally be expected to be true... that kind of spin is a daily occurrence in the political realm.

Re: "do you contest Jerry Brown's account of the facts purely on the basis of his political ideology?"
My experience in the sciences is that perspectives from anybody who's a passionate culture warrior should be taken with caution. Reality is just data, and the more you care, the more you've set traps for your intelligence that you may never discover.

>> ^ajkido:

>> ^chilaxe:
Maddow must be similarly outraged that liberal scientists like those in this video refuse to release their raw data, lest it give ammunition to their opponents.
I think there's more raw data available from climate research than one person can go through in a year. The "controversy" was about them making the different kinds of data fit their model, which can be a bit complex when different methods can be unreliable for some periods of time etc.
Although I'm pretty sure this won't change your opinion one bit. Goddamn republicans...


Critics of that climate research lab have long wanted the researchers to release their raw data, for fear that they were making the data fit their model. It's not relevant if there's more data than a single person can go through in a year. My criticism is of Maddow, not of climate change scientists.

I'm just an advocate for science and intelligence, not a conservative or a liberal, and it seems strange that you damn people to their face for advocating cognitive complexity. If liberals want to be seen as reliable societal partners, it would help if they stopped ignoring such transgressions of liberal principles.

>> ^chilaxe:
I'm just an advocate for science and intelligence, not a conservative or a liberal

Oh bullshit. You're the one who brought Brown's personal politics into this discussion.

@chilaxe, here's probably the key paragraphs from the report from Brown's office:

The edited O’Keefe videos released on the BigGovernment.com website portrayed ACORN as an organization infested with employees committing crimes. However, the impression of rampant illegal conduct created by the recordings at the various ACORN offices around the country is not supported by the evidence related to the videos in California. Our investigation revealed facts which were not reflected in the recordings. The San Diego employee’s answers were influenced by his limited English and intent to contact the police. The San Bernardino ACORN receptionist knew it to be a prank and made outrageous and false statements.

O’Keefe stated he was out to make a point and to damage ACORN and therefore did not act as a journalist objectively reporting a story. The video releases were heavily edited to feature only the worst or most inappropriate statements of the various ACORN employees and to omit some of the most salient statements by O’Keefe and Giles. Each of the ACORN employees recorded in California was a low level employee whose job was to help the needy individuals who walked in the door seeking assistance. Giles and O’Keefe lied to engender compassion, but then edited their statements from the released videos. Would it have been best had each ACORN employee simply refused to deal with the couple and shown them the door when their story came out? Of course.

When asked about the ACORN scandal, chilaxe said, "No ACORN staff behaved inappropriately." We also asked if it's true that in his spare time he reads books, and fucks goats, he replied, "The latter claim doesn't seem extraordinary and would generally be expected to be true."

My experience in the sciences is that perspectives from anybody who's a passionate culture warrior should be taken with caution. Reality is just data, and the more you care, the more you've set traps for your intelligence that you may never discover.

fuck

@NetRunner
My thesis was relatively narrow, criticizing Maddow's intellectual methodology, but has been interpreted in this thread very widely (opposing climate change research, defending O'Keefe).

My thesis was that it has all the indications of primitive tribalism (which is basically the subject of this video) to 1. consider an activist for your cause as a neutral intellectual authority (you're setting a trap for your intelligence) and to specifically introduce him to outsiders as a neutral party, and 2. to criticize opponents for things you wouldn't dream of criticizing your allies for (refusing to release data because it will give ammunition to opponents).

Someone interested in intelligence and principles would never do these things. We would be the first to say that the opinion of the Attorney General of x state is worthless if he disagreed with us and our opinion leaders.

@volumptuous: you're setting traps for your intelligence if you think questioning opinion leaders is beyond the pale (if they share x ideology with you).

It's a principle that's important to me to try to keep my discussions lighthearted --it's in everyone's best interest. Sometimes I'm happy with how I do, but I need to be more disciplined. Thanks for participating with us, @NetRunner, @ajkido, and @volumptuous.

This kind of practice is why I enjoy participating

>> ^chilaxe:
you're setting traps for your intelligence if you think questioning opinion leaders is beyond the pale (if they share x ideology with you).


It's not "questioning opinion leaders" when you use transparent attacks like:

• liberal activist and former "Governor Moonbeam"

• liberal scientists

• primitive tribalism.


Those are just straight up attacks. Yet you still claim you're advocate for science and intelligence?

(btw: nice one questioning my intelligence here. barf)

>> ^volumptuous:

>> ^chilaxe:
you're setting traps for your intelligence if you think questioning opinion leaders is beyond the pale (if they share x ideology with you).

It's not "questioning opinion leaders" when you use transparent attacks like:
• liberal activist and former "Governor Moonbeam"
• liberal scientists
• primitive tribalism.

Those are just straight up attacks. Yet you still claim you're advocate for science and intelligence?
(btw: nice one questioning my intelligence here. barf)


I don't think things are that serious.

-Here in California, news articles on Jerry Brown that reference his history often reference his nickname from the 70s, Governor Moonbeam. It's a concise reference to his position on the political bell curve (i.e. sometimes to the left enough that he's willing to stop supporting the Democratic party).
-There are [liberal/conservative] scientists & activists in the world who care about [liberal/conservative] causes and that has to be taken into account in our intellectual models.

I think discussions about cognitive biases & 'intelligence traps', is constructive, not insulting, and it's a great, important topic

"Primitive tribalism:" Yes, I'll stand by that one as my main criticism of politics in the 2010s. Being devoted to science doesn't mean refraining from criticizing either party.

This all being said, I understand it's my responsibility to make sure people don't feel attacked.

@chilaxe, I'm beginning to grow tired of having you try to beat everyone down with this accusation of tribalism and cognitive bias.

Since you are immune to the pull of these forces, please enlighten us, is global warming real or fake?

Is ACORN a criminal institution, or was the video published by James O'Keefe unrepresentative of the organization?

Once you work those two to a definitive conclusion, I have two more:

Who was telling the truth to the best of their ability about climate change, the scientists at East Anglia, or the people on Fox who reported that it was a hoax?

Who was telling the truth about ACORN to the best of their ability, James O'Keefe, or the people who said it did a lot of good for communities?

Finally, if your answers to those questions are, respectively, global warming is real, O'Keefe's video was unrepresentative, the East Anglia scientists, and the people who said it did a lot of good, wouldn't you be mad about the way in which the media has portrayed these events?

@NetRunner :

I think there's a lot of potential to improve progressivism and its ability to influence history, and that it's in humankind's best interest to do so. I'd like to first say I can, myself, improve my application of the below 2 principles enormously.

1. I give the general advice that progressivism become highly interested in how it can improve, and thereby increase its influence on history. You can't change your opponent, but you can adapt your own strategies. If the only reason Justices Roberts and Alito will be on the supreme court for the remainder of the current era is because of the far-left's strategy in 2000, which was a historical repeat of Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose mistake and Perot's more recent undermining of Bush Sr., admit it openly so we can learn and improve.

2. I give the specific advice that progressivism be seen as being high-minded, principled, and honorable. If you call for party x to release its data, also call for party y to release its data. If you call for the end of the unmooring of politics from fact, apply that prominently to your own allies, like Ms. Huffington, and above all, avoid political hypocrisy while criticizing others for political hypocrisy.

This will be one of my final debates on this site, as I think I've learned most of my lessons, so you'll no longer have to tire, Netrunner. Best of luck on your path, everyone

@chilaxe, you're a strange person.

Make sure to send me a postcard from the higher plane of existence. I've been thinking about buying some property up there.

[redacted]

*dead

Automatically replaced video embed code with backup #402 (supplied by member lampishthing) - video declared dead by member ctrlaltbleach.