re: #456 iceweasel

Fair enough- but I know zombie cherrypicked photos of the rally I attended, I know she cherrypicked data about Holdren (or simply does not understand how academia or science work), I know she stated the Bell Curve has not been refuted when it has, I know she cherrypicked studies from 30 years ago, before the advent of AIDS, about gay male sexual behaviour in bathhouses in SF as representative of the sexual promiscuity of all gay men everywhere everytime— and I know that all her errors mysteriously always benefit a so-con agenda.

We’re all entitled to our own opinions, of course, and i fully support everyone always looking at the evidence — all the evidence — and drawing their own conclusions.

And that’s my last word on it tonight.

I understand the points you are making. Having spent many days in Berkeley, I know that you see a whole lot of different things - many of which are just humdrum normal. But when you take a camera to a place, where you point it is a choice and it usually is one made in terms of wanting to highlight something in that place. People in Paris take pictures of the Eiffel Tower and not close ups of the cobblestones. Yet the cobblestones make up a bigger part of the experience (and the history when you know who they have been thrown at).

Zombie is being the radical s/he was trained to be against the system that trained her/him and will bring focus to what s/he sees as the mechanisms of the machine. S/he also knows (from that very environment) that getting caught up in a fraud will destroy everything s/he has worked for. So perhaps your skepticism is welcomed. Just the same, bringing focus and cherry picking become hard to distinguish within the context of rhetoric.