Birth gender ONLY! (Page 7): Although from a technical and scientific perspective I agree with the statement: ”. . . facts are facts and the nature of facts is that they are not in...

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

hondo812 wrote:

feelings are not facts. Now facts are facts and the nature of facts is that they are not in dispute.

Feelings are feelings and they belong to those that have them. Doesn't make them right or wrong until someone insists that feelings are facts when they most clearly are not, or when they act on them.
Certainly people can act on their feelings and be wrong. Prison is full of them.

Although from a technical and scientific perspective I agree with the statement: ”. . . facts are facts and the nature of facts is that they are not in dispute.”, it is obvious some people do not regard facts in the same manner as other persons do.

There are many examples, some of which are: Flat-Earthers, hollow-Earth adherents, those claiming: HIV does not cause AIDS. The world was created in 4004 BCE. Smoking does not cause cancer. Also election-outcome deniers.

SOURCE: https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/19/1/2/463780?login=false
”There is an overwhelming consensus on the evidence among scientists yet there are also vocal commentators who reject this consensus, convincing many of the public, and often the media too, that the consensus is not based on ‘sound science’ or denying that there is a consensus by exhibiting individual dissenting voices as the ultimate authorities on the topic in question. Their goal is to convince that there are sufficient grounds to reject the case for taking action to tackle threats to health. This phenomenon has led some to draw a historical parallel with the holocaust, another area where the evidence is overwhelming but where a few commentators have continued to sow doubt. All are seen as part of a larger phenomenon of denialism.”

SOURCE: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism(*)
”In the psychology of human behavior, denialism is a person's choice to deny reality as a way to avoid a psychologically uncomfortable truth. Denialism is an essentially irrational action that withholds the validation of a historical experience or event when a person refuses to accept an empirically verifiable reality . . .”

[There are two types fact-deniers, those practicing] ”. . .DENIAL (defined as "the empirical observation that reality and truth are being denied"), and DENIALISM (defined as "an ideological position whereby one systematically reacts by refusing reality and truth").
Persons and social groups who reject propositions on which there exists a mainstream and scientific consensus engage in denialism when they use rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of argument and legitimate debate, when there is none.

[Denialism] is a process that operates by employing one or more of the following five tactics to maintain the appearance of legitimate controversy:

Conspiracy theories — Dismissing the data or observation by suggesting opponents are involved in "a conspiracy to suppress the truth".

Cherry picking — Selecting an anomalous critical paper supporting their idea, or using outdated, flawed, and discredited papers to make their opponents look as though they base their ideas on weak research. Diethelm and McKee (2009) note, "Denialists are usually not deterred by the extreme isolation of their theories, but rather see it as an indication of their intellectual courage against the dominant orthodoxy and the accompanying political correctness."

False experts — Paying an expert in the field, or another field, to lend supporting evidence or credibility. This goes hand-in-hand with the marginalization of real experts and researchers.

Moving the goalposts — Dismissing evidence presented in response to a specific claim by continually demanding some other (often unfulfillable) piece of evidence (aka Shifting baseline).

Other logical fallacies – Usually one or more of false analogy, appeal to consequences, straw man, or red herring.

Common tactics to different types of denialism include misrepresenting evidence, false equivalence, half-truths, and outright fabrication . . .”

“In the sciences, denialism is the rejection of basic facts and concepts that are undisputed, well-supported parts of the scientific consensus on a subject, in favor of ideas that are radical, controversial, or fabricated. The terms Holocaust denial and AIDS denialism describe the denial of the facts and the reality of the subject matters, and the term climate change denial describes denial of the scientific consensus that the climate change of planet Earth is a real and occurring event primarily caused in geologically recent times by human activity.
The forms of denialism present the common feature of the person rejecting overwhelming evidence and trying to generate political controversy in attempts to deny the existence of consensus.

The motivations and causes of denialism include religion, self-interest (economic, political, or financial), and defence mechanisms meant to protect the psyche of the denialist against mentally disturbing facts and ideas; such disturbance is called cognitive dissonance in psychology terms.”

There is also ”Historical negationism, (also called [Historical denialism] is falsification or distortion of the historical record. It should not be conflated with historical revisionism, a broader term that extends to newly evidenced, fairly reasoned academic reinterpretations of history.

In attempting to revise the past, illegitimate historical revisionism may use techniques inadmissible in proper historical discourse, such as presenting known forged documents as genuine, inventing ingenious but implausible reasons for distrusting genuine documents, attributing conclusions to books and sources that report the opposite, manipulating statistical series to support the given point of view, and deliberately mistranslating texts.”
(Emphasis added).

(*) Wikipedia is used because there are Documented References within the article that may be checked for veracity —wyantry.

hondo812 Loc: Massachusetts

mwalsh wrote:

"Now facts are facts and the nature of facts is that they are not in dispute."

I think it is closer to "Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not a truth." -Anon

and Opinions are like arseholes, and most of 'em stink....

Here's a fact. The Moon is an average of 238,855 miles away from Earth.

Here's another fact. The Moon keeps moving away from Earth. The moon is moving away from Earth at a rate of 3.8 centimeters (1.5 inches) per year, but the speed of its retreat has varied over time.

At some point in the future the Moon will be an average of 238,856 miles from Earth. That will also be a fact. Not an opinion, a fact.

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

hondo812 wrote:

and Opinions are like arseholes, and most of 'em stink....

Here's a fact. The Moon is an average of 238,855 miles away from Earth.

Here's another fact. The Moon keeps moving away from Earth. The moon is moving away from Earth at a rate of 3.8 centimeters (1.5 inches) per year, but the speed of its retreat has varied over time.

At some point in the future the Moon will be an average of 238,856 miles from Earth. That will also be a fact. Not an opinion, a fact.

Here is another series of facts: The planet Earth is a more-or-less oblate-spheroidal mostly-solid to semi-solid mass, rotating clockwise (when viewed above its plane-of-rotation), with an inclined axis to its elliptical orbit, around a local star (the Sun), which is in an arm of a galaxy rotating about a central mass.
Just FACTUAL information. Verifiable. Provable. Demonstrable. FACTS.
Some folks do not like those facts — but it does not mean they are NOT TRUE.

Evidently FACTS do not enter into certain persons’ “chain-of-consciousness”. And they are unable to process observable data or draw rational conclusions based upon verifiable evidence and/or prior substantiated investigations or investigational methods. In other words: They are “deniers”.

LinksUp

JohnFrim wrote:

So how will these folks handle the rare instances of hermaphroditism?

So now we have to cater to the lowest denominator? Those people are genetic anomalies. We shouldn’t have to restructure the whole social fabric we have lived with for the last 7000 years.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Wyantry wrote:

b Here is another series of facts: /b The planet... (show quote)

Have you got the rotation direction correct? If I am high above the North Pole the earth is rotating CCW as I look down on it.

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

JohnFrim wrote:

Have you got the rotation direction correct? If I am high above the North Pole the earth is rotating CCW as I look down on it.

You are right. I got it backwards. Visualization was all FUBAR’d.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Wyantry wrote:

You are right. I got it backwards. Visualization was all FUBAR’d.

Don’t fret it. Everything is spinning these days, whether left or right, CW or CCW, true or false. It’s all FUBAR.

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

JohnFrim wrote:

Don’t fret it. Everything is spinning these days, whether left or right, CW or CCW, true or false. It’s all FUBAR.

And all the Spinners are FUBAR’d as well . . . .

hondo812 Loc: Massachusetts

Wyantry wrote:

b Here is another series of facts: /b The planet... (show quote)

Wait! Are you saying the Earth is....round?

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

hondo812 wrote:

Wait! Are you saying the Earth is....round?

Round . . . ? Well more of a lumpy oblate spheroid, but yes, definitely NOT “flat”.