this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
640 points (96.1% liked)

Memes

48891 readers
3060 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

:::spoiler spoiler

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago

No it isn’t synonymous. Evidence is in principle unambiguous

That's completely wrong. You don't know what the word "evidence" means, evidence isn't proof, and wrong ideas can have evidence.

If someone gets shot and the bullet is traced back to a gun you own, that's evidence that you did it. Sufficient evidence that the cops are going to come by with a few questions, possibly even arrest you. But it doesn't prove that you did it, the gun could've been stolen, for example, what it does is suggest that you did it.

Likewise, if someone develops some sort of health complication after being vaccinated, that's evidence that suggests vaccines are harmful. It's a very, very small piece of anecdotal evidence that's outweighed by the overwhelming majority of evidence in the opposite direction, but it's still evidence.

The word you're looking for is "proof" or "conclusive evidence." You are 100% wrong on this point.

(And it’s not a typo, it’s a factual mistake, as you’ve said.)

Actually, what I said is that I mixed it up with the date of a similar event, which is, you know, what a typo is.

Please reflect on the carelessness with which you've approached this argument that led to you making such mistakes.

I haven’t simultaneously claimed to be a leftist and that leftists should be experts in world history and economics, while you did

At every turn you’re attacking me, making a stereotype out of me and claiming I’ve said things I haven’t said in order...Do you find that I’ve done the same to you,

You're doing it right here. What I was talking about is what is expected, and what you've demonstrated you expect, not what should actually be the expectation.

However, since I have indeed not investigated the history of CIA, that’s exactly why I’ve made only minimal statements about CIA history

Bullshit. You repeatedly compared my saying that the CIA was involved to far-right antisemitic conspiracy theories about secret Jewish cabals. That's both a huge claim about CIA history, and it's far more accusatory than anything I've said about you. You're over here whining about "how every turn I'm attacking you" when the worst I've done is call you an annoying pedant because you've repeatedly attacked me over minor typos, while you've compared me to the fucking Nazis! And now you wanna play the victim? Do you really lack self-awareness to that degree?

Rest assured that my take away from this is not going to be "deep personal reflection on the carelessness that made me accidentally type a 3 instead of 6," it's that you're an annoying pedant.