What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Truth And Facts (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Talking in the other thread made me think how I think it's interesting how irrefutable facts are observed.

I know some people who think these statements are all equally true:

"2+2=4"

and

"Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback to ever play football."

Most people would agree with the 2+2 statement. Lots of people agree with the Tom Brady statement. And they feel anyone who doesn't is making an error equal to denying 2+2=4.

I agree with both statements. But I don't think they're equally true. 

I think there's a couple of things in play here.

1. Most people would rather "declare" than "explain". We live in a world of soundbites and twitter posts. People don't back up what they say as much as they used to. They don't listen as much. They make their points and drop the mic.

2. Confirmation bias is real and powerful. 

What else do you think is going on with this? 

 
1. Most people would rather "declare" than "explain". We live in a world of soundbites and twitter posts. People don't back up what they say as much as they used to. They don't listen as much. They make their points and drop the mic.
I think this is really important. People will cite a fact or two (that are complete true) and assume that ends the discussion. Something can be true but it doesn't necessarily tell us what the policy solution should be. Additionally there may be other equally important facts that could lead people to different conclusions. All too often we start at the conclusion and work backward to cherry pick facts rather than examining all the evidence to see where it leads us.

 
Let me offer a real life political example: 

Donald Trump said that he did not lose the popular vote in 2016 because there were over 3 million cases of voter fraud, most of them in California. This was a lie. President Trump offered no evidence, but insisted on the formation of a commission to investigate. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of tax money was spent, and no evidence was found. Despite that President Trump continues to this day to insist that he won the popular vote, and any source which reports otherwise is “fake news”. 

This is not a case of two different realities or two different perspectives. It’s a case of one reality, one truth, and a guy who is either lying or completely delusional or both. 

 
1. Most people would rather "declare" than "explain". We live in a world of soundbites and twitter posts. People don't back up what they say as much as they used to. They don't listen as much. They make their points and drop the mic.
You have some small number of your posters in this forum who really push back on even offering explanations for their opinions. I understand that support for radical positions is not always possible to find (as someone with radical ideas about several issues, I'm often a lonely voice in the wilderness) but we should always be willing to explain the "why" of our opinions when asked for it. Yet we see outright refusals to do so every day in here. That's not conducive to good discussion on your board and in my opinion is a pretty hostile thing to do.

 
Talking in the other thread made me think how I think it's interesting how irrefutable facts are observed.

I know some people who think these statements are all equally true:

"2+2=4"

and

"Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback to ever play football."

Most people would agree with the 2+2 statement. Lots of people agree with the Tom Brady statement. And they feel anyone who doesn't is making an error equal to denying 2+2=4.

I agree with both statements. But I don't think they're equally true. 

I think there's a couple of things in play here.

1. Most people would rather "declare" than "explain". We live in a world of soundbites and twitter posts. People don't back up what they say as much as they used to. They don't listen as much. They make their points and drop the mic.

2. Confirmation bias is real and powerful. 

What else do you think is going on with this? 
People have a great capacity to believe what they want to believe. They also have a great capacity to avoid thinking about why their opinions may be wrong.

Also I'd like to point out that in base 4,  2+2=10.  

 
timschochet said:
Let me offer a real life political example: 

Donald Trump said that he did not lose the popular vote in 2016 because there were over 3 million cases of voter fraud, most of them in California. This was a lie. President Trump offered no evidence, but insisted on the formation of a commission to investigate. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of tax money was spent, and no evidence was found. Despite that President Trump continues to this day to insist that he won the popular vote, and any source which reports otherwise is “fake news”. 

This is not a case of two different realities or two different perspectives. It’s a case of one reality, one truth, and a guy who is either lying or completely delusional or both. 
I believe we are at 8,000+ lies, falsehoods and mid representations at this point.   It’s a denial of service attack on reality.   

 
timschochet said:
Let me offer a real life political example: 

Donald Trump said that he did not lose the popular vote in 2016 because there were over 3 million cases of voter fraud, most of them in California. This was a lie. President Trump offered no evidence, but insisted on the formation of a commission to investigate. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of tax money was spent, and no evidence was found. Despite that President Trump continues to this day to insist that he won the popular vote, and any source which reports otherwise is “fake news”. 

This is not a case of two different realities or two different perspectives. It’s a case of one reality, one truth, and a guy who is either lying or completely delusional or both. 
The commission failed because most states, including California, did not cooperate with the commissions and refused to provide any data.  That seems like an important detail to leave out of this narrative...

 
The commission failed because most states, including California, did not cooperate with the commissions and refused to provide any data.  That seems like an important detail to leave out of this narrative...
Do you believe that there is data that California is hiding that would show 2-3 million cases of voter fraud? 

 
Talking in the other thread made me think how I think it's interesting how irrefutable facts are observed.

I know some people who think these statements are all equally true:

"2+2=4"

and

"Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback to ever play football."

Most people would agree with the 2+2 statement. Lots of people agree with the Tom Brady statement. And they feel anyone who doesn't is making an error equal to denying 2+2=4.

I agree with both statements. But I don't think they're equally true. 

I think there's a couple of things in play here.

1. Most people would rather "declare" than "explain". We live in a world of soundbites and twitter posts. People don't back up what they say as much as they used to. They don't listen as much. They make their points and drop the mic.

2. Confirmation bias is real and powerful. 

What else do you think is going on with this? 
1.a. Most people would rather “declare” than “learn.”  The phrases “I don’t know” or “I didn’t know that” or “thank you for correcting me, you are right” or some variation thereof mean you can’t “win” so they don’t happen.  

 
Do you believe that there is data that California is hiding that would show 2-3 million cases of voter fraud? 
I have not given it much, if any consideration.  I have done zero research on that claim, so whatever opinion I have has zero weight.

 
I have not given it much, if any consideration.  I have done zero research on that claim, so whatever opinion I have has zero weight.
This is exactly how Republican politicians have responded to most of President Trump’s more shameless lies over the last two years. 

 
This is exactly how Republican politicians have responded to most of President Trump’s more shameless lies over the last two years. 
Not sure what you're suggesting. If you don't know the answer, and you've done zero research and don't have an opinion, should you just make one up?

I would answer the exact same way if you asked me if I believe California engaged in voter fraud. I'd be surprised as I have (an often naive) belief people are good and do the right things. But I truly have no idea. 

 
1.a. Most people would rather “declare” than “learn.”  The phrases “I don’t know” or “I didn’t know that” or “thank you for correcting me, you are right” or some variation thereof mean you can’t “win” so they don’t happen.  
💰. It's a rare thing to see someone say they don't know. 

I don't know if it's a "geting old" thing but I've found being honest and just admitting I don't know the answer when I truly don't know can often wind up not being a "weak" answer at all. Sometimes it's the strong answer. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I basically see different types of lies:

There is the lie of misinformation whereas, misinformation is passed on as if it were the truth...ie..."Iran has WMDs"  There is also the lie of self-preservation...ie...answering the question, "does this make my butt look big?"  Then, there are lies of premeditated deception...ie..."if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.". 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure what you're suggesting. If you don't know the answer, and you've done zero research and don't have an opinion, should you just make one up?

I would answer the exact same way if you asked me if I believe California engaged in voter fraud. I'd be surprised as I have (an often naive) belief people are good and do the right things. But I truly have no idea. 
You truly have no idea whether or not there was voter fraud that involved over two million votes? Not a few hundred votes or a few thousand (even though that’s never happened either) But two million? 

I would think that common sense would tell you, as it should tell anyone, that it’s impossible. And for Rove to write  that he has no idea is, IMO, a deliberate avoidance of facts, which is just as bad as saying that 2+2=5. That’s what I’m suggesting. 

 
You truly have no idea whether or not there was voter fraud that involved over two million votes? Not a few hundred votes or a few thousand (even though that’s never happened either) But two million? 

I would think that common sense would tell you, as it should tell anyone, that it’s impossible. And for Rove to write  that he has no idea is, IMO, a deliberate avoidance of facts, which is just as bad as saying that 2+2=5. That’s what I’m suggesting. 




1
You know for a fact a few thousand votes have never been affected by fraud?

If you think someone saying they don't know for sure significant voter fraud was happening "is just as bad as saying that 2+2=5", I truly don't know what to tell you. We'll just have to strongly disagree and move on. 

 
You know for a fact a few thousand votes have never been affected by fraud?

If you think someone saying they don't know for sure significant voter fraud was happening "is just as bad as saying that 2+2=5", I truly don't know what to tell you. We'll just have to strongly disagree and move on. 
I don’t know about a few thousand. I know for a fact that there has never been evidence of it reported, but I don’t know for a fact if it happened. 

I DO know for a fact that there has never been MILLIONS of voter fraud from one state in a single election. That’s a lot more than “significant”, and yes anybody who asserts it is telling a lie just as bad as 2+2=5. 

 
Talking in the other thread made me think how I think it's interesting how irrefutable facts are observed.

I know some people who think these statements are all equally true:

"2+2=4"

and

"Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback to ever play football."

Most people would agree with the 2+2 statement. Lots of people agree with the Tom Brady statement. And they feel anyone who doesn't is making an error equal to denying 2+2=4.

I agree with both statements. But I don't think they're equally true. 

I think there's a couple of things in play here.

1. Most people would rather "declare" than "explain". We live in a world of soundbites and twitter posts. People don't back up what they say as much as they used to. They don't listen as much. They make their points and drop the mic.

2. Confirmation bias is real and powerful. 

What else do you think is going on with this? 
The difference is the first one is a fact, the second is subjective depending on the individuals criteria.

 
I don’t know about a few thousand. I know for a fact that there has never been evidence of it reported, but I don’t know for a fact if it happened. 

I DO know for a fact that there has never been MILLIONS of voter fraud from one state in a single election. That’s a lot more than “significant”, and yes anybody who asserts it is telling a lie just as bad as 2+2=5. 
If the genesis of this is a claim made from whole cloth, and it is, then why does it deserve some sort of respect? Joe, if I just start making stuff up are you going to tell my detractors "unless you do your research, then how can you know for sure"? Because I can get on that right away.

 
I DO know for a fact that there has never been MILLIONS of voter fraud from one state in a single election. That’s a lot more than “significant”, and yes anybody who asserts it is telling a lie just as bad as 2+2=5. 





 
What in the world are you talking about. 

You quoted my words of "If you think someone saying they don't know for sure significant voter fraud was happening "is just as bad as saying that 2+2=5", I truly don't know what to tell you."

And turned it into "That’s a lot more than “significant”, and yes anybody who asserts it is telling a lie just as bad as 2+2=5. "

That's super lame. And the kind of discussion that will have people disengaging. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the genesis of this is a claim made from whole cloth, and it is, then why does it deserve some sort of respect? Joe, if I just start making stuff up are you going to tell my detractors "unless you do your research, then how can you know for sure"? Because I can get on that right away.
Who says what deserves some sort of respect?

 
What in the world are you talking about. 

You quoted my words of "If you think someone saying they don't know for sure significant voter fraud was happening "is just as bad as saying that 2+2=5", I truly don't know what to tell you."

And turned it into "That’s a lot more than “significant”, and yes anybody who asserts it is telling a lie just as bad as 2+2=5. "

That's super lame. And the kind of discussion that will have people disengaging. 
Whoah hold on a minute. From the moment I offered this example, I consistently made the point that I was discussing Trump’s claim of MILLIONS of fake votes. Not a few thousand, not a “significant number,” but MILLIONS. That’s what Trump said, exactly, and I’ve made that point in every post and you’ve avoided responding to it. A million is a lot more than a “significant number.” 

I don’t understand why you or anybody else wouldn’t respond to the idea of a million fake votes (in a single state no less) with “that’s totally ridiculous!” Not “I have no idea!” Seriously? How can you have no idea about this? 

 
Whoah hold on a minute. From the moment I offered this example, I consistently made the point that I was discussing Trump’s claim of MILLIONS of fake votes. Not a few thousand, not a “significant number,” but MILLIONS. That’s what Trump said, exactly, and I’ve made that point in every post and you’ve avoided responding to it. A million is a lot more than a “significant number.” 

I don’t understand why you or anybody else wouldn’t respond to the idea of a million fake votes (in a single state no less) with “that’s totally ridiculous!” Not “I have no idea!” Seriously? How can you have no idea about this? 
Stop quoting me if you're going to reply to something completely different than what I said. 

 
Whoah hold on a minute. From the moment I offered this example, I consistently made the point that I was discussing Trump’s claim of MILLIONS of fake votes. Not a few thousand, not a “significant number,” but MILLIONS. That’s what Trump said, exactly, and I’ve made that point in every post and you’ve avoided responding to it. A million is a lot more than a “significant number.” 

I don’t understand why you or anybody else wouldn’t respond to the idea of a million fake votes (in a single state no less) with “that’s totally ridiculous!” Not “I have no idea!” Seriously? How can you have no idea about this? 
It's easy.  You can not prove there has never been voter fraud on the scale of a million.  You just can't.  It's easy to prove it happened but impossible to prove it didn't.

It is a bad comparison to boot.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stop quoting me if you're going to reply to something completely different than what I said. 
That’s fine. But Joe, that’s exactly what you did to me. In every one of my posts I referred specifically to the claim of two million fake votes, and you responded by discussing “a few thousand votes” or a “significant number” of votes. 

Can you agree with me that the claim of over two million fake votes is absurd? You don’t need to know ANY details; can you agree that it’s ridiculous? All I’m asking. 

 
That’s fine. But Joe, that’s exactly what you did to me. In every one of my posts I referred specifically to the claim of two million fake votes, and you responded by discussing “a few thousand votes” or a “significant number” of votes. 

Can you agree with me that the claim of over two million fake votes is absurd? You don’t need to know ANY details; can you agree that it’s ridiculous? All I’m asking. 
You mentioned a few thousand votes first.

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/774582-truth-and-facts/?do=findComment&comment=21760191

 
Who are the people that don’t agree 2 + 2 = 4?!
Toddlers maybe?

💰. It's a rare thing to see someone say they don't know. 

I don't know if it's a "geting old" thing but I've found being honest and just admitting I don't know the answer when I truly don't know can often wind up not being a "weak" answer at all. Sometimes it's the strong answer. 
 When I was interviewed for my current job they said their favorite answer of mine  to any of their questions was “I don’t know”. They appreciated me being honest about not knowing what something was instead of just BSing it.

 
That’s fine. But Joe, that’s exactly what you did to me. In every one of my posts I referred specifically to the claim of two million fake votes, and you responded by discussing “a few thousand votes” or a “significant number” of votes. 

Can you agree with me that the claim of over two million fake votes is absurd? You don’t need to know ANY details; can you agree that it’s ridiculous? All I’m asking. 
You need to read what you wrote. You said a few hundred or a few thousand had never happened. I quoted that and replied directly to what you said. 

Not a few hundred votes or a few thousand (even though that’s never happened either)
I already said I'd be surprised if there was this kind of voter fraud happening. Seems like a ridiculous thing to say. 

I also think it's ridiculous to say if someone says they don't know if that kind of voter fraud is happening it's just as bad as saying 2+2=5.

I'll bow out here with you. We will just disagree and that's cool.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You know for a fact a few thousand votes have never been affected by fraud?

If you think someone saying they don't know for sure significant voter fraud was happening "is just as bad as saying that 2+2=5", I truly don't know what to tell you. We'll just have to strongly disagree and move on. 
People saying, "I have no evidence this happened, but I'm going to assert it over and over again, and we should make public policy based on that assertion" is very much 2+2=5.

 
You need to read what you wrote. You said a few thousand or a few thousand had never happened. I quoted that and replied directly to what you said. 

I already said I'd be surprised if there was this kind of voter fraud happening. Seems like a ridiculous thing to say. 

I also think it's ridiculous to say if someone says they don't know if that kind of voter fraud is happening it's just as bad as saying 2+2=5.

I'll bow out here with you. We will just disagree and that's cool.  
OK. I think my point was pretty clear, since I made it over and over. It strikes me that we’re talking over each other rather than disagreeing with each other. I don’t disagree with anything you wrote; and I guess you misunderstood what I wrote. 

 
People saying, "I have no evidence this happened, but I'm going to assert it over and over again, and we should make public policy based on that assertion" is very much 2+2=5.
When the conversation changes to actively making policy, then "I don't know" isn't an acceptable answer. You have to know if you're going to make policy. You don't get to :shrug: and then make policy. 

 
What? No I didn’t. Read it again please. I wrote, “a few million NOT a few thousand.” 
I just linked it 

You truly have no idea whether or not there was voter fraud that involved over two million votes? Not a few hundred votes or a few thousand (even though that’s never happened either) But two million? 

 
OK. I think my point was pretty clear, since I made it over and over. It strikes me that we’re talking over each other rather than disagreeing with each other. I don’t disagree with anything you wrote; and I guess you misunderstood what I wrote. 
Your post was totally clear. And I understood fully. Sorry. I can't speak for you. But I'm certain I disagree and we can move on. 

 
When the conversation changes to actively making policy, then "I don't know" isn't an acceptable answer. You have to know if you're going to make policy. You don't get to :shrug: and then make policy. 
Sorry... I jumped into the middle of this without reading through whole thing.

In general, if you claim something that's highly improbable the burden is on you (not you, Joe -- just generally) to show your work.  And the vote fraud people can never do it (almost certainly because it doesn't exist on any scale).

 
In truth and facts in this thread. A poster correctly identifies a fact, Donald Trump lost the popular vote. That’s the truth. Yet somehow, a “discussion” ensues. That’s part of the problem that it seems like the OP is describing. Yet, here it is. It’s disappointing. 

 
Who says what deserves some sort of respect?
You, the claim made from whole cloth. Well you didn't say respect, but we can round up when you suggest a claim made from whole cloth does not equal 2+2=5. Let's get to the operating part of my post please. Why do you think disregarding (as in saying 2+2=5) whole cloth claims should be researched?

 
When logic dies, impulse becomes truth.

My father - research scientist, inventor of the grow light - has a daughter who has said "I don't believe in science". More than once. My sister has no religion, no life cause ('cept pets), no axe to grind and honestly believes no fact need be accepted as such. She phylls it, she sorta phylls it, she ain't quite phyllin' it, she don't phyll it. nufced. She is 62 years old.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What else do you think is going on with this? 
We in the US didn't have these conversations in 2014 or 1914 or 1955 or 1985 or 1885, right?

What's going on is that for the first time in US history we have a president who challenges the notion of truth as a defined real thing outside of politicization. This is - in (yes) truth - a defining characteristic of dictatorial, fascistic and even stalinistic societies. And I'm sorry to say that, because it sounds hyperbolic, but again it's "true" historically. It's extremely dangerous and the biggest problem America is facing right now.

And I think some people realize that, and so, like here, unlike before, when they see others post/claim things that have zero truth or factual underpinning as reality, then they respond aggressively, because yeah it very much matters.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
One way you can see who is who is by identifying those who attack reporters of fact, ie journalists, academics, experts, historians. If a person is trying to break down the reporter of fact as disqualified based on their ideology especially but also by the nature of their being who they are (ie journalist, etc.), then you are talking to someone who is engaging in strictly antidemocratic, authoritarian behavior, even if they are unaware of it themselves.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback to ever play football."
Sports doesn't have a comp. People don't go around saying 'Tom Brady is the greatest quarteerback of all time, because he's never thrown an incompletion and he can throw a ball 90 yards on a string.' Serious sports fans would never tolerate this.

If someone says 'Trump is the greatest president of all time', that's fine. If someone says 'Trump is the greatest president of all time because he ended global conflict and single handedly provided us all with the greatest economy of all time' that is not ok.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top