MIT Analysis Shows 69,000 Trump Votes Flipped to Biden in Michigan

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,303

3

4

9

11.15.2020 10:47PM

3

4

9

11.15.2020 10:47PM

-->

@oromagi

We're not arguing with the Dr. Ayyadurai here, we are arguing against your use of such a notoriously bogus source.

And you're doing quite a fine job of it as well.

Look, I don't give a flying flip about who the hell said it.

All I know is that a horde of rabid Trumpists are out for blood and the American election system has no redundant integrity checks.

Telling the horde "you're a bunch of dumb conspiracy nuts" isn't going to calm them down.

In-fact, it's been proven to make them even more rabid.

I appreciate the links you provided that very specifically addressed the apparent statistical anomalies.

I am forever indebted to you.

Topic's author

#32

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,303

3

4

9

11.15.2020 10:49PM

3

4

9

11.15.2020 10:49PM

-->

@Greyparrot

Remember this quote the next time a politician in Authority tells you to "listen to the science and trust it"

Trust the science (only after rigorous peer review), distrust the scientist.

#33

Debates: 117

Posts: 8,689

8

10

11

11.15.2020 11:09PM

8

10

11

11.15.2020 11:09PM

-->

@3RU7AL

All I know is that a horde of rabid Trumpists are out for blood and the American election system has no redundant integrity checks.

Well the Trumpists are out for blood but it is quite false that the American system has no redundant integrity checks. Let's note that it also Trumpists who were largely in charge of election security this time around. Trump's administration has already declared this election the most secure in US history, largely because there was so much concern about foreign interference, in spite of Trump's claim to the contrary. It's like a fire department quickly and safely extinguishing a house fire in spite of the Fire Marshall's constantly running 5 gallon cans of gasoline into the house while tweeting out that the rafters are aflame.

Topic's author

#34

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,303

3

4

9

11.15.2020 11:24PM

3

4

9

11.15.2020 11:24PM

-->

@oromagi

It's like a fire department quickly and safely extinguishing a house fire in spite of the Fire Marshall's constantly running 5 gallon cans of gasoline into the house while tweeting out that the rafters are aflame.

Well stated.

#35

Debates: 32

Posts: 10,568

4

7

11

11.16.2020 12:56AM

4

7

11

11.16.2020 12:56AM

-->

@3RU7AL

is this fraud or what?

#36

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

4

7

10

11.16.2020 01:46AM

4

7

10

11.16.2020 01:46AM

-->

@Dr.Franklin

What

#37

Debates: 24

Posts: 618

3

4

7

11.16.2020 01:51AM

3

4

7

11.16.2020 01:51AM

-->

@3RU7AL

Your source also did this:

During the COVID-19 pandemic Ayyadurai used social media to spread various conspiracy theories and misinformation about the pandemic.[citation needed] In January 2020 he claimed that the coronavirus was patented by the Pirbright Institute, but the patent he referenced relates to avian coronavirus, which infects birds, not SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the pandemic.[51] Ayyadurai defined COVID-19 as "an overactive dysfunctional immune system that overreacts and that's what causes damage to the body", and claimed that vitamin C could be used to treat it.[52]He alleged that the coronavirus was spread by the "deep state" and accused Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, of being a "Deep State Plant". Ayyadurai called for Fauci to be fired[53] and his supporters lobbied for Fauci to be replaced by Ayyadurai.[54]In March 2020 he published an open letter to president Donald Trump where he wrote that a national lockdown was unnecessary and advocated that large doses of vitamins could prevent and cure the disease.[55] In April 2020, Politico and Vanity Fair reported that QAnon supporter DeAnna Lorraine recommended that Shiva be included in coronavirus discussions at Donald Trump's White House.[56][57]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_Ayyadurai#COVID-19_misinformation

Credibility low.

#38

Debates: 32

Posts: 10,568

4

7

11

11.16.2020 02:11AM

4

7

11

11.16.2020 02:11AM

-->

@Theweakeredge

what?

#39

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

4

7

10

11.16.2020 02:16AM

4

7

10

11.16.2020 02:16AM

-->

@Dr.Franklin

Well, you asked:

is this fraud or what?

I'm saying, as this conversation is proving, that it's clearly not voter fraud, so the answer to your question must be what.

#40

Debates: 32

Posts: 10,568

4

7

11

11.16.2020 03:04AM

4

7

11

11.16.2020 03:04AM

-->

@Theweakeredge

it is voter fraud, this election was stolen

#41

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

4

7

10

11.16.2020 03:11AM

4

7

10

11.16.2020 03:11AM

-->

@Dr.Franklin

Prove it

#42

Debates: 1

Posts: 5,875

3

6

11.16.2020 05:12AM

3

6

11.16.2020 05:12AM

-->

@Theweakeredge

That is what our courts are for. Due process is a right of every American citizen, from President Trump to Justice Kavenaugh.

#43

Debates: 1

Posts: 5,875

3

6

11.16.2020 05:14AM

3

6

11.16.2020 05:14AM

-->

@3RU7AL

Good thread: So you see that logical precision only frustrates poor thinkers.

Big minds focus on Ideas. Small minds focus on people.

#44

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

4

7

10

11.16.2020 05:15AM

4

7

10

11.16.2020 05:15AM

-->

@ethang5

Um... that isn't relating to Dr, Franklin's assertion. Regardless if the courts try this, Dr. Franklin has made an assertion and therefore necessarily adopts the burden of proof.

#45

Debates: 1

Posts: 5,875

3

6

11.16.2020 05:37AM

3

6

11.16.2020 05:37AM

-->

@Dr.Franklin

@Theweakeredge

It is directly related to Doc's opinion. Doc expressed an opinion which I'm sure he expects to be validated by the courts.

The facts that

servers have been confiscated

Switch Votes have been correctly reassigned to Trump

Governor have been reprimanded by the courts

Whole states have started recounts, and

Eyewitnesses have filed sworn affidavits in courts

Shows Doc is reasonable in his opinion.

#46

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

4

7

10

11.16.2020 05:43AM

4

7

10

11.16.2020 05:43AM

-->

@ethang5

I could care less if it was the President's opinion, huh fancy that, the fact is they both made a claim and have to back it up. And I would rebuke all those claims, I really would, but the people before me have done it so much better than I have. Just go read this forum.

#47

Debates: 1

Posts: 5,875

3

6

11.16.2020 06:18AM

3

6

11.16.2020 06:18AM

-->

@Theweakeredge

That's about the size, where you put your eyes, that's about the size of it.

- Old Sesame Street song.

#48

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

4

7

10

11.16.2020 06:19AM

4

7

10

11.16.2020 06:19AM

-->

@ethang5

Ohkaaaaay.... I'm sorry I have no idea what you're talking about.

#49

Debates: 24

Posts: 618

3

4

7

11.16.2020 06:34AM

3

4

7

11.16.2020 06:34AM

-->

@Theweakeredge

The right has seemed non-factual ever since racism became socially unacceptable, but once you understand that they're really speaking in code where ABC means XYZ then things start to make sense. They're accustomed to dog whistles, beating around the bush with lies and what have you. They'll talk about states rights, the harm principle, trickle down economics, individualism, super predators, welfare queens, and whatever but what it's really about is implementing policies that are bad for blacks. They can't just come out and say what they're really thinking so they're all code talkers. You have to learn the code to understand them. Now that you see that they're speaking in code, then you see the code and when it looks like they're lying, well they're not really lying because they don't mean what they said. You have to look at the underlying meaning. Like, when Dr. Franklin says it was a stolen election, what he really means is that he's butthurt about losing and is trying to cover up the pain with some bullshit. Then he hasn't lied to you at all. He just needs someone to help him feel better.

#50

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

4

7

10

11.16.2020 06:44AM

4

7

10

11.16.2020 06:44AM

-->

@Death23

Makes sense, but I still like the principal of being intellectually honest myself, even if my opponents might not be.

#51

Debates: 20

Posts: 3,192

3

9

11.16.2020 03:50PM

3

9

11.16.2020 03:50PM

-->

@3RU7AL

This is a perfect example.

The entire point of that story is to highlight exactly why it's so important to evaluate EACH INDIVIDUAL CLAIM ON ITS OWN MERIT.

If you remember the parable, the villagers were eaten by the wolf at the end because they ignored valid warnings.

Well stated.

--> @oromagi
the counterargument is not "3RU7AL is a liar and his argument therefore disproved"
Let's take a look at your actual statement from [POST#7]

the counterargument is "3RU7AL's claim lacks any credible evidence in support"
Oh, really?

Is that what you meant when you said,

"I don't think its an ad hom to point out that Dr Ayyadurai is a famous conspiracy theorists whose false reports have previously led to major retractions of claims from the Washington Post and the Smithsonian Institute (Ayyadurai absurdly claims to have invented email while attending high school in 1979, 8 years after the first documented emails were transmitted) Ayyaduria went to MIT but that doesn't make his analysis an "MIT analysis" MIT does publish a well respected voter analysis 6-8 months after the vote. Hell, Michigan won't even publish an official vote count until Nov 23rd. Do we really think MIT is analyzing data that hasn't been published yet?"
Hmmm, I can't find the part where you say anything at all about the claim itself.

Well stated again. There's a lot of attacking the source, not the information. Discrediting the source does not discredit the information. There's also a bit of appeals to incredulity being imputed in these responses here, i.e. "Do we really think MIT is analyzing data that hasn't been published yet?" That which we "really think" is irrelevant. Dr. Shiva and a small team of election investigators conducted an an analysis of all voting data in the State's four largest counties. The information of this analysis is either verifiable or not. It is either correct or it is not. Mentions of "conspiracy theorists" and previous reports do nothing more than distract from the aforementioned.

#52

Stephen

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,321

3

2

Stephen

11.16.2020 04:07PM

3

2

11.16.2020 04:07PM

-->

@3RU7AL

Any data presented with the aim to discredit the PERSON (while ignoring the substance of their specific CLAIM) is, quite technically, the very definition of an AD HOMINEM ATTACK.

A1+

#53

Debates: 117

Posts: 8,689

8

10

11

11.16.2020 04:11PM

8

10

11

11.16.2020 04:11PM

-->

@Athias

Well stated again. There's a lot of attacking the source, not the information. Discrediting the source does not discredit the information. There's also a bit of appeals to incredulity being imputed in these responses here, i.e. "Do we really think MIT is analyzing data that hasn't been published yet?" That which we "really think" is irrelevant. Dr. Shiva and a small team of election investigators conducted an an analysis of all voting data in the State's four largest counties. The information of this analysis is either verifiable or not. It is either correct or it is not. Mentions of "conspiracy theorists" and previous reports do nothing more than distract from the aforementioned.

So be sure to address post #10 and post #14 where Dusty & I explained why Dr Ayyadurai's claims were bullshit

#54

Debates: 20

Posts: 3,192

3

9

11.16.2020 05:01PM

3

9

11.16.2020 05:01PM

-->

@oromagi

So be sure to address post #10 and post #14 where Dusty & I explained why Dr Ayyadurai's claims were bullshit

Why? What does that have to do with your ad hominem?

I did see your quote, and dustyryder's summary of Stand-up Maths video. Those in themselves are sufficient rebuttals to Dr. Ayyadurai's claim. That's all that's necessary. Yet you still sought to discredit Dr. Shiva's character and relate it to the submission of his claim before and after your reference. Why?

#55

Debates: 117

Posts: 8,689

8

10

11

11.16.2020 05:06PM

8

10

11

11.16.2020 05:06PM

-->

@Athias

Why? What does that have to do with your ad hominem?

Because then you would be guilty of attacking the source and not addressing the information

#56

Debates: 20

Posts: 3,192

3

9

11.16.2020 05:23PM

3

9

11.16.2020 05:23PM

-->

@oromagi

Because then you would be guilty of attacking the source and not addressing the information

I've no particular stake in the veracity of Dr. Shiva's claim nor am I concerned about your stake. And I'm not "attacking you." Read my statement. It strictly focuses on the information and the arguments. Contradicting the arguments is not akin to attacking the source. (And that's sort of the point.) You're conflating source with the argument. Furthermore, notice that I quoted two of 3RU7AL's statement where he responds to your extending the ad hominem. I typically quote that to which I'm directly referring. I was not referring to the entirety of your participation on this thread. That would've been my following comment.

#57

Debates: 4

Posts: 22,928

3

4

10

11.16.2020 05:27PM

3

4

10

11.16.2020 05:27PM

-->

@ethang5

Big minds focus on Ideas. Small minds focus on people.

I agree. Gossip should be discouraged on this site.

#58

Debates: 4

Posts: 22,928

3

4

10

11.16.2020 05:29PM

3

4

10

11.16.2020 05:29PM

-->

@Theweakeredge

ever since racism became socially unacceptable...

Ah to live in a world where media isn't constantly reminding you of the importance of skin color... to dream a dream.

#59

HistoryBuff

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,901

3

HistoryBuff

11.16.2020 05:30PM

3

11.16.2020 05:30PM

-->

@Greyparrot

Ah to live in a world where media isn't constantly reminding you of the importance of skin color... to dream a dream.

yeah, things are so much simpler when racism is ever present, but just not talked about. It lets racist people off the hook. I would imagine that would be very attractive to republicans.

#60

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

4

7

10