Foxx Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) Are you the radical Muslim apologist ? Or one those cool antifa guys ? How many marches have you been in ? What size kitty hat do you wear? I'm a white guy who feels no guilt. Come at me bro. actually, i am none of those. what i am, is aware. i am under no illusion that there are not many types of agent provacateurs out and about trying to shape public opinion. it is considered fact that all one needs is 3% and you can change just about anything. i'll tell you what though, i do not want to destroy your paradigm and the normalcy bias you so desperately want to reside in, so i will leave you be in your obliviousness. good luck with all that. Edited March 26, 2017 by Foxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 actually, i am none of those. what i am, is aware. i am under no illusion that there are not many types of agent provacateurs out and about trying to shape public opinion. it is considered fact that all one needs is 3% and you can change just about anything. i'll tell you what though, i do not want to destroy your paradigm and the normalcy bias you so desperately want to reside in, so i will leave you be in your obliviousness. good luck with all that. Got it. All that #%*ing nonsense because 3% of the likes were by provocateurs!! Shut up hippee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 Blah blah blah now tell me how people sit idly by as governments tear down their churches synagogues and mosques. They will just sit there and watch? Nothing will happen I guess. Sigh... literally five posts up is where I said nothing would CHANGE, not nothing would HAPPEN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 i'll tell you what though, i do not want to destroy your paradigm and the normalcy bias you so desperately want to reside in, so i will leave you be in your obliviousness. "Normalcy bias"? Meathead, is that you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 Sigh... literally five posts up is where I said nothing would CHANGE, not nothing would HAPPEN. A realtively peaceful place turns into mini-wars in every burgh on the planet but nothing "changes". Ok brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 "Normalcy bias"? Yeah...you've never heard of "obfuscation with normalcy?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 A realtively peaceful place turns into mini-wars in every burgh on the planet but nothing "changes". Ok brilliant. The people who start warring over religions no longer existing are in all likelihood the ones warring as we speak. The overwhelming majority won't care because we're civilized humans and we don't start killing other people just because we feel we've lost something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 Yeah...you've never heard of "obfuscation with normalcy?" That's right up there with "obfuscation with details". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) The people who start warring over religions no longer existing are in all likelihood the ones warring as we speak. The overwhelming majority won't care because we're civilized humans and we don't start killing other people just because we feel we've lost something. If you really think that the government could walk into every town in any nation and tear down the places of worship and no violence would ensue, I don't know what to say. Edited March 26, 2017 by 4merper4mer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 "Normalcy bias"? Meathead, is that you? sorry, but no. are you being obtuse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 Can someone, anyone, please define "normalcy bias" please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) sorry, but no. are you being obtuse? I'm not. See below: Can someone, anyone, please define "normalcy bias" please? The best synonym I can find without all the sensitivity trend-speak included would be "denial". But you know how it goes - the best way for life's noobs to look more intellectual than their antecedents is to come up with new terms for old ideas. Edited March 27, 2017 by Azalin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) Can someone, anyone, please define "normalcy bias" please?It is pretty much defined. From a simple Google search: "The phenomenon of disbelieving one's situation when faced with grave and imminent danger and/or catastrophe. As in overfocusing on the actual phenomenon instead of taking evasive action, a state of paralysis." Edited March 27, 2017 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 It is pretty much defined. From a simple Google search: "The phenomenon of disbelieving one's situation when faced with grave and imminent danger and/or catastrophe. As in overfocusing on the actual phenomenon instead of taking evasive action, a state of paralysis." Like I said - denial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Like I said - denial. With a state of paralysis. That is quite different than just "denial." Denial doesn't always cause paralysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 With a state of paralysis. That is quite different than just "denial." Denial doesn't always cause paralysis. Okay then, it's denial with a built-in excuse for inaction, AKA "kitty mode". It's nothing new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Can someone, anyone, please define "normalcy bias" please? It is pretty much defined. From a simple Google search: "The phenomenon of disbelieving one's situation when faced with grave and imminent danger and/or catastrophe. As in overfocusing on the actual phenomenon instead of taking evasive action, a state of paralysis." basically, in practice, it means that when faced with something that conflicts with your normal ever day existence you discount it because you simply will not have your normal beliefs disrupted. you believe that things will always operate as they normally do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 basically, in practice, it means that when faced with something that conflicts with your normal ever day existence you discount it because you simply will not have your normal beliefs disrupted. you believe that things will always operate as they normally do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 basically, in practice, it means that when faced with something that conflicts with your normal ever day existence you discount it because you simply will not have your normal beliefs disrupted. you believe that things will always operate as they normally do. You know when that stops? When your head is rolling down a flight of stairs, that's when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Sunday Shows Ignore London Jihadist Attack | Daily Wire Flagship Sunday news shows for ABC, CBS, CNN, and MSNBC/NBC collectively ignored Wednesday’s mass murder Islamic terrorist attack in London. This Week, Face the Nation, State of the Union, and Meet the Press all refused to dedicate any time to examining the Islamic terrorist attack. Fox News Channel broke ranks with its competitors, with Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace dedicating some time to discussing the Islamic terrorist attack in an interview with Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts