• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Scientific American endorses Joe Biden

Metaphor said:
The last noun was the dishonest and inept response to COVID-19
Click to expand...
Yes, that was the last noun. I'm glad you now agree with me.
Click to expand...

Wrong again. Only the word "response" is a noun. "dishonest" and "inept" are modifying adjectives, which you included to suit your deluded opinion.
 
Metaphor said:
There is nothing ambiguous about it. In what universe does "a curious exhibit was the jewelled hat made for the Queen's beagle" mean that the curious exhibit was the Queen's beagle?
Click to expand...
You really do have a problem with the English language. It is a legitimate interpretation that the beagle not the jewelled hat is the curious exhibit. That does not mean it it is preferred or common interpretation.

Metaphor said:
Is this how bad English comprehension is in the United States?
Click to expand...
However bad it is in the US, it apparently is even worse in Australia if your responses are representative of Australians.
 
While it should be clear to all adults in the forum that the word "pandemic" is a noun, there's something else here as well.

As I stated before, this is an introductory paragraph in the article. The ideas present in each of the sentences is later explored and supporting facts given. This provides context. Such context does not support an interpretation that SA thinks all deaths were caused by Trump policies.

But there's more than just this examination of context that disambiguates syntactic linkages of the which-clause to different antecedents. There's also going back to the paragraph and observing a web link in the sentence:
The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people—because he rejects evidence and science. The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which [HERE -->] cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives [<-- HERE] by the middle of September. He has also attacked environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges. That is why we urge you to vote for Joe Biden, who is offering fact-based plans to protect our health, our economy and the environment. These and other proposals he has put forth can set the country back on course for a safer, more prosperous and more equitable future.
Click to expand...

The phrase links to statistical data at the CDC website. Nowhere at the CDC site does it say Trump caused these deaths. It's a factual statement of how many deaths there were by mid-September in the US due to covid. To repeat, it's not linking to an extremist website somewhere like at counterpunch or antifa or somewhere I-don't-even-know-where that would claim Trump killed everyone.

I mean you have a sentence that someone could try to claim syntactically might refer to either Trump's response or the pandemic costing a total of 190,000 deaths by mid-September in the US. Then, you have a supplied link that says the pandemic cost a total of 190,000 deaths by mid-September in the US. You do not have a link that says Trump cost a total of 190,000 deaths by mid-September. But really, the statistic is common knowledge and so this inference ought to be made at the time by a reasonable person.

Frankly, the "Oh so many people around here claim Trump did it" is a sneaky way to insert an attack on other posters. And when we examine those claims by looking at posts we can see that those were exaggerations by Metaphor.

Now, besides this, if one looks further at the article and all the context provided by drilling down into the facts, one can see that other countries are looked at where even when the policies were good, they still resulted in deaths, and so again, one has to make an inference that SA does NOT believe Trump is the cause of 100% of deaths if those exemplar countries are lauded....and all in the context that even with good policies countries and systems will be strained...they write: "[t]he pandemic would strain any nation and system..."

The TFT forum, previously FRDB, and previous to that IIDB, has a rich history. This history includes increasing awareness of science and logic, increasing awareness of logical fallacies...debates...debates against Creationists. An exploration of Creationist propaganda--to include frowning upon quote-mining. As rational people we ought not accept biased interpretations based on taking a sentence out of context, but instead in our tradition of logic and analysis, we ought to look at context and use Reason.
 
Metaphor said:
bilby said:
Oh, that's simple: Prescriptivism is fucking stupid horseshit that bears no relationship to how real people use language to communicate ideas. English has no rules, other than those mutually agreed from moment to moment by its users.

I am glad I could clear that up so easily for you.
Click to expand...


You are mistaken. You didn't clear anything up, except perhaps something like "the sentence means what the majority of people who already agree with bilby say it means".
Click to expand...

FTFY.

And you were so close.

Perhaps there's hope for you yet.
 
Metaphor said:
ZiprHead said:
Metaphor said:
So, how many people would be dead from COVID right now if Biden had been president?
Click to expand...

How many dead would it takes for the SA sentence that got your underwear in a bunch to be accurate?
Click to expand...

In one sense, it would take 190,000 deaths that occurred solely due to Trump's dishonesty and ineptness (compared with some counterfactual 'honest' and 'ept' response death toll). But the sentence would not actually be true at the time that SA wrote it, since there have been 190,000 deaths in total, not 190,000 extra deaths due to ineptness and dishonesty.

In another sense, it could never be true, since the '190,000' in the sentence refers to every COVID-19 death in America, and there is no meaningful way to ascribe every COVID-19 death in America to one person's incompetence or ineptness or dishonesty.
Click to expand...

So, no real answer to the question. Just :words:
 
Metaphor said:
Even somebody guilty of dishonesty and ineptness doesn't deserve to be accused of things he didn't, and logically couldn't, have done.

But, more to the point, I'm not actually defending Trump by pointing out his detractors will accept any disparaging remark about him as true, even when the remark could not possibly be true. This thread is a case in point.

What you have said is that "little lies" (a "microscopic issue") doesn't matter, as long as the people who are the target of them deserve contempt and hatred. At the same time, little lies against your own side are called out and the little liar is attacked for them.

Well, I think little lies do matter. Though I think attributing every single COVID-19 death in America to one person isn't a little lie. It's a plain fat big one.
Click to expand...

You're big on calling out lies and hypocrisy, you start a new thread or jump on a subject almost daily, yet not one thread started by you on Trump's monumental lies and hypocrisy.

What are we supposed to think about this?
 
Metaphor said:
My priorities are not yours. I do not rank-order my priorities based on what Don2 thinks they ought be. That's the latest attack directed at me - my 'priorities' are not someone else's. It's such an absurd attack. Someone, somewhere, is lobbying their local council right now to get a 'STOP' sign added to a certain T-junction. Priorities! People are dying and you want a 'STOP' sign installed!
Click to expand...

Everyone here knows your bullshit priorities.

You're not fooling anyone.
 
Remember Trump's ridiculous Hail Mary "syntax save" of 2017?
"I meant to say, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be Russia. Instead of would be Russia."
Umm, Donald, they both have a smell of treasonous, venomous ignorance. But all is well in Trumpistan, because Dear Leader says so.
 
Metaphor said:
Scientific American said:

“The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the Covid-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives,” the editors wrote.
Click to expand...

So - and I've already said this elsewhere - Trump is responsible for every single death by COVID in America? Had someone else managed the response, or had Trump managed it but not been 'inept' and 'dishonest', there would be zero deaths by COVID in America?

Why do people -- allegedly people who you might expect to understand rudimentary reasoning -- say things like Trump is responsible for 190,000 COVID deaths?
Click to expand...

190,000 is not every single death. It's a lot of them, which is why he should be hung by the neck until his chubby little leggs stop kicking, but not all of them are his fault.
 
The news here is not grammar, contrary to what the russian troll farms want you all to believe (so please, if you can't refrain, use the fucking ignore function).

The news is that Scientific American, one of the premier science publishers in the US (the world?) has NEVER, prior to this, felt the need to get involved in politics enough to endorse a candidate. Let's be clear about this. The magazine started in 1845. That's over 150 years of relatively non-partisan history that only now they have broken with that tradition because they think (evidence based thinking may be beyond some arguing otherwise here. Again, ignore them.) that the current president is SO BAD and dangerous that it's worth breaking that tradition.

Let that sink in. And ferfucksake, stop arguing with idiots. They drag you all down to their level and beat you with experience.
 
laughing dog said:
Metaphor said:
There is nothing ambiguous about it. In what universe does "a curious exhibit was the jewelled hat made for the Queen's beagle" mean that the curious exhibit was the Queen's beagle?
Click to expand...
You really do have a problem with the English language. It is a legitimate interpretation that the beagle not the jewelled hat is the curious exhibit. That does not mean it it is preferred or common interpretation.
Click to expand...

Okay. My English teachers K-12 have a lot of 'splaining to do.
 
ZiprHead said:
Metaphor said:
My priorities are not yours. I do not rank-order my priorities based on what Don2 thinks they ought be. That's the latest attack directed at me - my 'priorities' are not someone else's. It's such an absurd attack. Someone, somewhere, is lobbying their local council right now to get a 'STOP' sign added to a certain T-junction. Priorities! People are dying and you want a 'STOP' sign installed!
Click to expand...

Everyone here knows your bullshit priorities.

You're not fooling anyone.
Click to expand...


What, precisely, do you imagine my priorities to be, and what actions have I taken that are evidence I am trying to "fool" people?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom