Rich Conway
Footballguy
Because, as noted, there isn't nuance in these items. There is an objective right and wrong. The election was not "stolen". There isn't any nuance there and we need to stop indulging the fantasy that there is.
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.
Remember when, around a year ago, a lot of people complained that this forum skewed left? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
WHITE ADVANTAGE
White people invented the term 'work ethic' to keep the colored people down.
supermike80
Footballguy
There is significant debate about climate change, for instance. But I am NOT having that discussion with you. Not happening.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
You throw terms around race all the damn time. I mean a black guy couldn't pee at Starbucks because he didn't order anything and you screamed racist for a month. No details. No nuance. No anything. It was automatically racist because it happened to a black dude.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Exactly. It's pointless when he starts the conversation with this is what I think, I'm 100% right, and you're a denier if you think anything otherwise. These kinds of posters are only here to push their beliefs on others. Not worth engaging for 1 second.
supermike80
Footballguy
CNN has decided climate change will be the next item they will try to influence. So guess what you will see a lot more of here in the next few months?
timschochet
Footballguy
This post is just another lie; you seem to love misrepresenting me, so much so that I now believe it’s deliberate.
White privilege is a very complicated, nuanced issue. I certainly believe it exists, but to what extent I’m not sure, and it’s often hard to define. In addition I have no earthly idea what to do about it; I’m not especially in love with most of the ideas being floated around by progressives these days.
If you think the above is a dogmatic point of view then I have no idea what to tell you.
supermike80
Footballguy
Dude..You again and again dismissed posts from others documenting their issues. My post isn't a lie, its a summary of what you did. SO in that case, yes it is deliberate. When you do that, you get called out on it. Deal with it. You represent everything we are saying is wrong with those that don't agree with your point of view. Dismiss them, call them names..etc. It's horrible.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Climate change exists. The speed at which it’s happening is debatable. What actions we as a society should take in response to it is HiGHLY debatable, and personally I’m very unsure about this. As with racial issues, I tend to be skeptical of leftist solutions.
If you deny climate change is happening, you are a climate change denier. The rest of it is open to legitimate discussion.
timschochet
Footballguy
What I wrote is that if you’re going to argue against white privilege, then IMO personal anecdotes of struggle from a white person is not compelling. That’s not meant to be insulting; just my opinion.
supermike80
Footballguy
Dismissing someone's personal stories is what's insulting--and how you did it was doubly so. We get it. Only your opinions are correct. Period. So if you don't mind, can you just maybe stay out for a bit? Maybe let the people who actually respect other's opinions talk for a while? I think we all know where you stand.
Sand
Footballguy
Tim, stick with easy stuff - racism is bad, Nazis are bad. Gravity deniers are wrong, etc.
You undermine your own arguments when you throw in stuff like this. There is plenty of nuance in these subjects. There are thousands of published papers on these issues recently.
timschochet
Footballguy
There’s a couple of people (not very many) that I dislike in these forums, but I don’t think I’ve ever addressed any of them as rudely as you have here.
If you find my posts so offensive then the moderators have provided you a solution for that problem. Otherwise perhaps you should take your own advice.
supermike80
Footballguy
I apologize your feelings were hurt and I will move on now. It hurts when someone dismisses you in kind so quickly doesn't it? Think about that.
timschochet
Footballguy
There’s tons of nuance about climate change as I’ve expressed- just not about that it’s happening and that it’s bad. I’m not aware of any recent challenges to evolution.
timschochet
Footballguy
I don't see any nuance that the media is bias, but yet you argue that all the time.
Your whole elitist viewpoint that some ideas are not debatable I find absolutely detestable. There are dozens of topics that you have convinced yourself that any deviance from is just wrong and unworthy of discussion. There still are legitimate concerns about how accountable our voting system is. IMHO, I should get a copy of how my vote was registered and I should be able to check that my vote was actually counted accurately. Until we have that level of accountability there is no way for certain to accurately reconcile the vote. Let's say if someone produced thousands of test ballots in Georgia and submitted them in these unmanned ballot boxes, what system is in place to catch that? Sure you can recount those ballots over and over again, but that does not catch fraud. We place a lot of trust in our election workers, and the systems we have in place do not ensure that only one vote is cast by legal voters and that the individual vote was recorded and counted correctly. Until we get to that point, there is going to be disputes in the election results. And there is nothing wrong with that.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Yes you have. Many times. It's like you've lost your memory overnight or something. The rest of us haven't forgotten though
Who is to say evolution won't take care of climate change? Not you that's for sure. Call me a timschochet denier if you want.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I LITERALLY responded to @Rich Conway post describing the nuance he was missing yet all I got were crickets. And then he goes on to repeat the same dogmatic rhetoric in subsequent posts after mine.
Here: https://forums.footballguys.com/topic/796715-remember-when-around-a-year-ago-a-lot-of-people-complained-that-this-forum-skewed-left/?do=findComment&comment=23407448
Last edited by a moderator:
Sand
Footballguy
It would be best when you approach items like climate change to be more precise - you're talking anthropomorphic climate change. Climate change, in and of itself, has been happening for roughly 3 billion years on this rock.
As far as evolution there has been plenty of publications recently over human origins. Very nuanced, very complex findings.
timschochet
Footballguy
First off I’m going to dismiss your opening statement as some kind of sarcasm. If you truly believe that there is no nuance to the statement “the media is biased” then I have no idea what to tell you. But I don’t think you believe that.I don't see any nuance that the media is bias, but yet you argue that all the time.
Your whole elitist viewpoint that some ideas are not debatable I find absolutely detestable. There are dozens of topics that you have convinced yourself that any deviance from is just wrong and unworthy of discussion. There still are legitimate concerns about how accountable our voting system is. IMHO, I should get a copy of how my vote was registered and I should be able to check that my vote was actually counted accurately. Until we have that level of accountability there is no way for certain to accurately reconcile the vote. Let's say if someone produced thousands of test ballots in Georgia and submitted them in these unmanned ballot boxes, what system is in place to catch that? Sure you can recount those ballots over and over again, but that does not catch fraud. We place a lot of trust in our election workers, and the systems we have in place do not ensure that only one vote is cast by legal voters and that the individual vote was recorded and counted correctly. Until we get to that point, there is going to be disputes in the election results. And there is nothing wrong with that.
Second, there aren’t “dozens of topics” that I consider settled. There are only a few. The election of 2020 is one of them. Your scenario doesn’t change that because (a) there wasn’t any significant voter fraud and (b) it was a national election.
And you’re also wrong when you claim I find anything unworthy of discussion. I’m happy to discuss the 2020 election and argue why it’s a settled issue. But in that discussion I’m going to use the term “denier” to describe anyone who thinks Trump won. Not because it’s lazy, not because I’m not nuanced or rudely dismissive, but because no other term would be accurate.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
AGAIN! NO ONE IS DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE EXISTS!
That is what you guys keep pushing - there is plenty of debate of the causes and how fast it may be happening but NO ONE IS DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE EXISTS!
So when you use term "climate change denier" you are indeed mischaracterizing the issue to shut down conversation.
Between you and @Rich Conway I'm not sure how much clearer we can be. It's like you're purposefully being obtuse. I'm not sure how much clearer we can be for you to understand.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
I think I’ll call you a timschochet obsessor, rather creepily so IMO. There’s a few people who seem to love following me around from thread to thread. You’ve taken it to a whole new level.
timschochet
Footballguy
https://www.google.com/amp/s/grist.org/politics/poll-the-partisan-gap-on-climate-change-is-widening/amp/AGAIN! NO ONE IS DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE EXISTS!
That is what you guys keep pushing - there is plenty of debate of the causes and how fast it may be happening but NO ONE IS DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE EXISTS!
So when you use term "climate change denier" you are indeed mischaracterizing the issue to shut down conversation.
Between you and @Rich Conway I'm not sure how much clearer we can be. It's like you're purposefully being obtuse. I'm not sure how much clearer we can be for you to understand.
82% of Democrats believe that the effects of global warming have already begun.
29% of Republicans believe that the effects of global warming have already begun.
I hold that the latter is a form of denial.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
If you don't think the main stream media is totally biased then you're a truth-denier. Period. End of story. No nuance and discussion necessary. You just don't accept the truth
BladeRunner
Footballguy
, Tim. And you know it. Even polls have all kinds of nuance you're not looking at. But polls are not my point.As @Sand pointed out earlier, climate change has been happening since Earth was created. No one is denying that.
When you use "climate change denier", not only are you saying "they're as bad as Nazi's", you're also saying "they don't believe in climate change".
That's ridiculous, absurd and totally mischaracterizing the other sides argument. Totally and unequivocally. You're being disingenuous purposefully and we're asking you to stop and see the nuance.
Stop being dogmatic in your approach.
Last edited by a moderator:
I find it odd that the left understands the historical connotations to a lot of terms and wants their usage banned, but some are perfectly OK with using terms which are meant to associate people with holocaust deniers. There are a lot of people on the left who refuse to go there, and many that do use the term readily admit the connotation of the term and think it is appropriate.
Just a side note that I find interesting. I've seen this a couple of times lately.
It doesn't matter if you meant it to be insulting.
It's the equal to "I'm sorry you were offended".
Also, this is me doing the talking about other posters thing which has no value and I'd much rather us all not do.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
1. I suppose I need to clarify that I’m speaking of man-made climate change that has become an emergency in recent years due to mankind’s use of carbon based fuel. If you don’t believe this is happening then yes I say you are a denier.
As @Sand pointed out earlier, climate change has been happening since Earth was created. No one is denying that.
When you use "climate change denier", not only are you saying "they're as bad as Nazi's", you're also saying "they don't believe in climate change".
That's ridiculous, absurd and totally mischaracterizing the other sides argument. Totally and unequivocally. You're being disingenuous purposefully and we're asking you to stop and see the nuance.
Stop being dogmatic in your approach.
2. Please stop with the Nazi analogies. I don’t use them and I find them very offensive. I don’t regard you, or anyone reading this, as a Nazi. I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a Nazi (except once at a gun show.)
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
I think it does matter. I think intent matters a great deal.Just a side note that I find interesting. I've seen this a couple of times lately.
It doesn't matter if you meant it to be insulting.
It's the equal to "I'm sorry you were offended".
Also, this is me doing the talking about other posters which I'd much rather us all not do.
For example, I just asked @BladeRunnerto stop using Nazi analogies because I find them offensive. I’m not upset with him because I don’t think he mean to be offensive. But if he does it again in response to me then I will know that it’s his intent to be offensive.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
When you use the term "denier" in political speak, you are implicitly referring to the opposition as "Nazi's" whether you believe it or not.
Like we've been telling you, it's a term weaponized by the left (like "RACIST!", "HOMOPHOBE!", etc...) to shut down conversation. In political speak, "denier" is without a doubt rooted in Holocaust deniers.
timschochet
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I'm trying to get you to understand that your use - and that of your party's use - of the word "denier" is absolutely rooted in Nazi terminology.
As well read as Tim is, it is unbelievable that he is really this oblivious to what he is doing.
You have done it a dozen times on the last two pages with your continue insistence on using the Denier rhetoric.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Of course you don't.
I'll just repurpose your previous post:
"For example, I just asked @timschochet stop using "denier" terms because I find them offensive. I’m not upset with him because I don’t think he mean to be offensive. But if he does it again in response to me then I will know that it’s his intent to be offensive. "
Last edited by a moderator:
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Rich Conway
Footballguy
I disagree as well. However, in the interest of harmony, I'd be happy to use another term, as long as it's accurate.
"Skeptic" isn't accurate, as it implies there is legit debate. We could go with "rejectionist".
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Yet when someone tells you the terms you use are offensive, you disagree, call them the truth and keep using them. I don't know if you're tone deaf, you're trolling, or you simply mash the keyboard so much you don't read anything but this post couldn't be anymore ridiculous. You think you get to set the definition of everything for everyone on these forums. I know it's one of the reasons I have almost zero respect for what you post.
You're in every damn thread all day long spreading your BS. I have no idea why Joe lets you turn this into your own personal forum about yourself.
timschochet
Footballguy
I’m not oblivious to your argument, I just don’t agree with it. In fact I find it ridiculous. By attempting to claim that anyone who uses the term “denier” is actually calling someone a Nazi, all you’re doing effectively is dismissing the accuracy of the label and shutting off all further discussion- EXACTLY what you claim the other side is doing.
When I use the term denier I am not calling anyone a Nazi. Full stop. I am not attempting to cut off discussion. Full stop.
timschochet
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
I’m fine with “rejectionist”. But I doubt it will make any difference. I’m convinced that, despite their protests, it’s the substance of what we’re saying, and not the terminology, that bothers them.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Tim gets to dictate what his terms mean. Full Stop. Tim gets to dictate what Jon's terms mean. Full Stop. Tim gets to dictate what everyone means. FULL STOP!!!! Full Stop I said!
quick-hands
Footballguy
Boston Globe columnist Ellen Goodman wrote: "Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers . . . "
The epithet “climate denier,” intended to invoke Holocaust denial, has always been tasteless and inapt.
The epithet “climate denier,” intended to invoke Holocaust denial, has always been tasteless and inapt.
So you get to decide which Nazi rhetoric is OK? I can link you hundreds of sources on this topic (I already linked to several above). The term denier is absolutely intended to equate people to holocaust deniers.
Similar threads
