Yep, good summary.
Yep, good summary.
Remember, you said, "Literally none of the story is true.", and "It is 100% false." You parroted the claim that the images were, "from people who "liked" the pizza restaurant's page". You claimed, "a bunch of instagrams from people who have nothing to do with Comet Pizza", whereas many of the photos are from THE OWNER OF COMET PIZZA.
Clearly evidence of a secret pedophilia ring reaching into the corridors of power.
Well then, now that we've moved beyond the fact your starting position was complete bullshit, perhaps you would like to look at all the evidence?
So far, there is no smoking gun. There are, however, plenty of disturbing facts that can't be handwaved away and derided as fake. Why is the press so eager to spin this story as 100% fake and debunked?
By the way, did you notice how the owner of the pizza restaurant didn't post the photo you linked to?
Actually, he did. That's an archive of a post on "jimmycomet"'s Instagram, a.k.a. James Alefantis.
And how it's not proof of anything other than someone making a really bad joke?
At this point, there's just suggestive evidence. And that is, by no means, the only photo involving young children in really bad taste. But remember, we're being told every claim is false. Except for those pesky photos. And a bunch of other stuff that are facts. So I'm just wondering how all these news sites know nothing untoward is going on here.
And also a bunch of instagrams from people who have nothing to do with Comet Pizza.
I love how you ignore the fact one of those Instagram accounts is from the THE OWNER OF COMET PIZZA. You know, the one which includes the taped down girl. But go on, tell me again how it's 100% false.
TFA goes into some detail about how it was discovered that every claim made was false.
Which article? Provide a link, please, because the article for this story doesn't talk about Pizzagate.
I want to see the article that shows every claim made was false. Though I'm sure the mainstream would never spin a story, ignore facts, or otherwise, right? It's only those fake news sites like Breitbart that we have to worry about, right?
A little something for you to ponder while you're digging up that article.
Literally none of the story is true.
So you bought that fake news narrative without checking?
Not only did the whole thing start as an online hoax by pranksters
How do you know that? Some things are pranks, some things are conspiracy theories (that may even have some truth behind them).
but the images in the supposed Instagram are from people who "liked" the pizza restaurant's page
Here's where you are dead wrong. Some of the images are from associations, but some very creepy ones involving children were found directly on the owner's Instagram account, "jimmycomet", including the young girl taped to the ping pong table with a male standing suggestively behind her. Ha ha, very funny?
None of the "FBI charts of code words" are from the FBI.
But the symbols are.
None of the information that the #pizzagate morons point to is true. It is 100% false.
Maybe if you weren't reading "fake news" and did some checking, you wouldn't be saying this. I haven't even gotten into the kind of art that Tony Podesta (John Podesta's brother) had at his home, which is documented by mainstream sources.
Here is a comprehensive, detailed rundown with citations on the history of this hoax and whether a single fact or assertion about pizzagate has been proven true or is possible to be proven true:
And here's an archive version of the summary Snopes is "debunking". It also has citations, with archives of pages that have since been made private, deleted, or changed.
fake news conspiracies like Pizzagate that drag on for months even after being shown to be completely false
How was it shown to be "completely false"?
Uhm, that's the early middle.
Muhammad died a conquering warlord. Jesus died a persecuted hippie. Following the example of Muhammad, the conquering continued after he died.
What proxy science.
The science surrounding the Mannian hockey stick, which lie at the claim you made surrounding recent warming being "faster than any natural cycle". Though even that claim is wrong unless you limit yourself to the past 1,000 years or so. Peer-reviewed climate proxies show dramatic swings in climate.
Data and methodologies are publicly accessible and subject to peer review.
Climategate showed scientists unwilling to release their data, even to the point of preferring to delete it. It showed scientists deleting email around the IPCC process. It showed scientists pressuring other scientists to boycott journals that published peer-review articles they didn't like. It also showed scientists publishing manipulative graphs to the wider public.
And just because something passed peer review doesn't make it true or even good science. Plenty of bad science has passed that bar.
You mean since you found an excuse to get your confirmation bias on - just like the anti-vaxxers.
You're wrong. My initial position was to trust the scientists, even though I knew modeling the Earth was a complicated and uncertain business. What Climategate showed was science corrupted by politics and confirmation bias.
You guys come up with a reason yet for why, in an industry where a single company can make $40 billion in a single quarter, they haven't been able to debunk climate science if it's all faked?
How can you "debunk" something that doesn't have simple answers? I didn't say "it's all faked". That you're even going that route shows you don't understand the complexity of the topic or the wide range of views between "Hoax!" (100% denier), "The sky is falling!" (alarmist), and anything in between. It also doesn't help that the topic is highly politicized and biased in one direction.
Outdating talking point #3,475: Wind now competes with fossil fuels. Solar almost does
Wind isn't available everywhere. And solar has down days and is also not available everywhere in useful capacity. You still need the base load. Nothing beats coal for cheapness and availability. If it did it there wouldn't be any discussion, we'd just be using the alternatives.
Slight correction: the world has no appetite for the cost of nuclear.
Maybe, though if the concern is carbon dioxide it's a reasonable alternative to look at. The public, though, has no appetite for nuclear because of worries about catastrophic failures and nuclear waste.
Fake news are hoax news made especially to lie to people.
That's all well and good, but there's a spectrum between hoaxes, spin, and unbiased (as is reasonably possible) factual reporting. What the mainstream media is trying to do is conflate "fake news" with alternative, right-wing news sites that put their own spin on the news, but it isn't "fake".
As should be obvious by now, the mainstream news has a left-wing bias and apply their own spin to stories, sometimes more blatantly than others. And there are plenty of blatantly left-wing sites to correspond with right-wing sites, but they haven't been scrutinized while sites like Breitbart have.
It's also known that humans are driving climate change faster than any natural cycle.
If you believe the proxy science. I don't trust it since Climategate.
On the one hand, trees are supposed to be very important for reconstructing past climate. On the other hand, when the most recent tree data from the past several decades didn't match thermometer data, they just truncated the tree data, hypothesized that only modern trees weren't behaving, and concluding based on thermometer readings versus truncated proxy readings that the current rise is unprecedented.
I will also point out that most of the rise from global warming is also a hypothetical one based on feedback from cloud formation, and the science is still very much unsettled on that. If anything, the climate models have been running way too hot compared to the actual warming that has taken place.
And finally, there's the economic problem, because cheap energy has brought more people out of poverty, while renewable energy is just not nearly as cheap or efficient on the large scales needed to do away with fossil fuels, and the world has no appetite for nuclear.
The thing about Christianity is that it has the shitty, barbaric God first (The Old Testament), followed by the loving God second (The New Testament). That's why you had to go to the Old Testament to get the barbaric bits. In the New Testament, Jesus says to be virtuous, to love one another, and to not resist evil. He's a hippie (without the free love).
With Islam, it's reversed. There's a peaceful, no compulsion in religion period, followed a war-mongering, tyrannical period under which Islam spreads. Contradictions in instruction are resolved by giving the latter period priority.
"Dr. Bill Warner - Why Are People Afraid"
"Islam has bloody borders."
"Nevertheless, there is a problem that goes back to the very beginnings of Muslim history: From the time that the first Muslims established themselves as the rulers of Medina, Islam was a political and increasingly a legal system as well as a faith. In Medina Muhammad continued to be a prophet, but he also became the head of a state and a military leader. With the exception of Southeast Asia (where Islam was spread by traders from the the subcontinent), what we now know as the Muslim world was established by conquest. It is no accident that in traditional Muslim thought the world is divided into two spheres--the realm of Islam (dar ul-Islam) and the realm of war (dar ul-harb). Put simply, it is assumed that the border between Islamic rule and the rest of the world marks a state of war, even if periods of armistice are possible. One should be cognizant of the important fact that there are Muslim thinkers today who are reformulating the nature of Islamic law (sharia) and of Islamic war (jihad) in a much more liberal manner. But one must also recognize that there is a weighty tradition to the contrary and that a large number of Muslims, possibly the majority, does not favor these reformulations."
Is it good and proper to jail a Juggalo because of their association
If you could be jailed for poor taste, then yes.
Do you think that 2 years jail when no crime has actually been committed is appropriate though?
I agree. He should have been parachuted into ISIS territory. That removes the local threat, gives him what he's idolizing, and a fighting chance. That's pretty fair.
Fair enough, but there appear to be blatantly fabricated "evidence" from the pizzagaters (photos taken from random websites, etc. [snopes.com]).
Look how they try to muddy the waters. Here's an archive version of the summary Snopes is "debunking". It has links to other archives, including one of a photo with a very young girl with her arms taped to a table, taken from "jimmycomet"'s instagram, a.k.a. James Alefantis, owner of Comet Ping Pong.
Just a harmless joke? Maybe, in isolation, but there's lots of creepy shit surrounding this to make you think otherwise.
The real stuff can be found in archive.is. One thing learned in GamerGate early on was to archive everything before stuff got deleted or set to private, and the denial and smog machine got cranked up.
Always look over your shoulder because everyone is watching and plotting against you.