Irresponsible claims have recently emerged from conspiracy theorists on social media regarding the supposed public nudity of the emperor. Fortunately, we have determined that those claims are entirely false. The facts are these: 1.) The emperor is currently nude, and currently appearing in a public setting.
The meaning of conspiracy theory is evolving too rapidly for me to keep up. Once it meant gray aliens orchestrating the assassination of JFK to distract from Elvis's fabrication of the Moon landing. Then it meant accurately predicting what the government would do based on policy papers published by the government. Now it means ... using slightly different vocabulary to describe the same thing, I guess?
"I like strawberries."
"Fact check, conspiracy theorist! You have a preference for red ground berries!"
"The sky is blue."
"AKSHUALLY the sky is currently cerulean with patches of eggshell white and gunmetal grey, you RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY THEORIST! Stop spreading misinformation!"
On the other hand, we're basically in a situation described by Mark Crispin Miller; people who call reality a "conspiracy theory" are people whose worlds would be totally destroyed by acknowledging the truth, so they cling to whatever will let them continue to dwell in their carefully constructed, shape-shifting fantasy. Everyone else (and I don't know what percentage of people this is) acknowledges, at least to himself, the truth. I guess we'll see whether it makes a damned bit of difference in what happens next. Good to see my local jackwagon (Rubio) is focused on the key issue of classified documents in Biden's underwear drawer, instead of maybe the totalitarian and utterly creepy goings-on at FDA and CDC. Walensky just gave herself a boatload of additional power, and no one in Congress batted an eye. Too busy figuring out how to escalate our proxy war and benefit their cronies in the arms industry, I guess.
I’ve commented on this thread already, but I have a serious and relevant story to share that quite literally just happened 5 minutes ago. I’m a professional civil engineer that works for a small consulting firm. The firm just started a “climate change adaptation and response” department, where a fellow who works in this new department emailed me 3 weeks ago if he could muscle into one of my recent projects to push his new mandates on “considering the climate”. My project is literally the design of a small drainage ditch to collect spring melt water. I emailed him this morning that I’m not interested in anything that will cost the client money if it’s not quantifiable (I asked him if he had some numbers for me I could use that would alter my ditch design). He just emailed me back saying “akschewally we do have numbers on this that all good engineers should be considering this”…then linked me to a Canadian government webpage that just waxes poetically about the dangers of climate change (no numbers, and no data). Then in the last half of the email he admits that he can’t quantify anything but he can give me a “qualitative” write up on it and the importance of considering it. So I was wrong to suggest that he supply me data for my design. He can supply data…if by data it is meant that he can write me a rant about how important climate change is (“qualitative assessment”).
This is bunk. I know because I pre-bunked your de-bunk from the bunk you de-bunked. Re-bunking some bunk doesn’t unbunk the de-bunk which I pre-bunked.
Someone need to make a list or website for all the conspiracy theories that are no longer untrue. Then I can send it to my family and friends who think I need a tin foil hat.
The irritating thing is that if even a single human uses the slightly inaccurate term "banned," this style of "fact-checking" will continue. Imagine if the media held, say, the federal government or Pfizer employees to this standard.
The meaning of conspiracy theory is evolving too rapidly for me to keep up. Once it meant gray aliens orchestrating the assassination of JFK to distract from Elvis's fabrication of the Moon landing. Then it meant accurately predicting what the government would do based on policy papers published by the government. Now it means ... using slightly different vocabulary to describe the same thing, I guess?
"I like strawberries."
"Fact check, conspiracy theorist! You have a preference for red ground berries!"
"The sky is blue."
"AKSHUALLY the sky is currently cerulean with patches of eggshell white and gunmetal grey, you RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY THEORIST! Stop spreading misinformation!"
Those under 50 are clearly not banned. They're just waiting for their 50th birthday.
👏 You are the Emperor of Satire, Chris.
What I'm hearing in this article is that I can have a pterodactyl.
We are not doing Gain of Function!
We are merely enhancing desired traits, transmissibabilty modifications, lethality adjustments, via Directed Evolution!
On the other hand, we're basically in a situation described by Mark Crispin Miller; people who call reality a "conspiracy theory" are people whose worlds would be totally destroyed by acknowledging the truth, so they cling to whatever will let them continue to dwell in their carefully constructed, shape-shifting fantasy. Everyone else (and I don't know what percentage of people this is) acknowledges, at least to himself, the truth. I guess we'll see whether it makes a damned bit of difference in what happens next. Good to see my local jackwagon (Rubio) is focused on the key issue of classified documents in Biden's underwear drawer, instead of maybe the totalitarian and utterly creepy goings-on at FDA and CDC. Walensky just gave herself a boatload of additional power, and no one in Congress batted an eye. Too busy figuring out how to escalate our proxy war and benefit their cronies in the arms industry, I guess.
I’ve commented on this thread already, but I have a serious and relevant story to share that quite literally just happened 5 minutes ago. I’m a professional civil engineer that works for a small consulting firm. The firm just started a “climate change adaptation and response” department, where a fellow who works in this new department emailed me 3 weeks ago if he could muscle into one of my recent projects to push his new mandates on “considering the climate”. My project is literally the design of a small drainage ditch to collect spring melt water. I emailed him this morning that I’m not interested in anything that will cost the client money if it’s not quantifiable (I asked him if he had some numbers for me I could use that would alter my ditch design). He just emailed me back saying “akschewally we do have numbers on this that all good engineers should be considering this”…then linked me to a Canadian government webpage that just waxes poetically about the dangers of climate change (no numbers, and no data). Then in the last half of the email he admits that he can’t quantify anything but he can give me a “qualitative” write up on it and the importance of considering it. So I was wrong to suggest that he supply me data for my design. He can supply data…if by data it is meant that he can write me a rant about how important climate change is (“qualitative assessment”).
We are not attempting same-sentence hypocrisy. We are merely satire deficient.
Damn this is easy. I am in the wrong job.
This is bunk. I know because I pre-bunked your de-bunk from the bunk you de-bunked. Re-bunking some bunk doesn’t unbunk the de-bunk which I pre-bunked.
Fact. Checked.
Oh boy, Chris, you make the pain go away, if only for a few minutes. On that note, I am grateful for the protection your factcheck has provided. Amen.
Someone need to make a list or website for all the conspiracy theories that are no longer untrue. Then I can send it to my family and friends who think I need a tin foil hat.
The irritating thing is that if even a single human uses the slightly inaccurate term "banned," this style of "fact-checking" will continue. Imagine if the media held, say, the federal government or Pfizer employees to this standard.
Some idiot <----- "Menthol Cigarettes are not banned you just can't get them anymore."
How can I get a job as fact checker? Looks easy!
Fucken GOLD.
Another brilliant satire Mr. Bray! Kudos!