As is usually the case, let's cut through the mostly useless word salad and get back to the topic at hand.
I’m educated enough to know the difference between “that guy has no reason to lie” and “I accept everything he says as biblical truth”. Clearly you are not.
You disagreed with:
He told a story.
I asked if he felt his source was reliable
He said yes
I said he has no reason to lie
So you have launched into an insult spewing, loss of personal control attack over me saying he teusts his source and I think he is being honest when he says that.
Not sure where the jump to your trip off the reservation cane from.
Again, this isn't that difficult. You're trying to be willfully obtuse here instead of just admitting the obvious. The thought process is simple:
"I see no reason for you to lie" = just simply accepting what he's saying as the truth. There is no difference. If you truly weren't accepting what he was saying as the truth, you'd be taking the same stance as I am. The "I hope you're right, but we need further clarification stance".
Didn’t go over my head, I said he has no reason to lie, and your panties got bunched.
Never said his story proved anything just that he trusts his source and there is no reason for him to lie. See critical thinking involves thinking and thinking involves paying attention to what you are reading. Better luck next time.
This coming from the guy that constructed the straw man that I was calling SBB a liar. This is comedy gold.
No they don’t. And it’s not belichicks responsibility to air dirty laundry in fact if he did people would be up in arms that no free agent will ever come here.
It's not airing dirty laundry at all. Vrabel and Belichick are close. One would think that Vrabel and the Titans at least asked why Butler was benched. If what SBB said was true, that would give any team pause prior to offering the guy a $60M contract. That doesn't mean they still wouldn't have done it, but that's a hell of an investment for a guy that decided to get drunk and high and toss verbal barbs at the head coach's son in the lead-up to the biggest game of the year.
No THINKING is the basis of critical thinking. Taking a nugget out of a complex issue and asking if the person has faith in their source and concluding they have no reason to lie, is a step along the process of critical thinking.
Apparently you think knowing no facts and dismissing any out if hsnd without considering the factors of their validity is critical thinking which is what leads to you being you.
No, what leads to me being me is recognizing that I don't know SBB from a hole in the wall and wanting to seek further clarification on what he said from multiple sources instead of taking his word at face value because I like the sound of what he's saying. The former is thinking critically. The latter is what you did and now you're trying to squirm your way out of it while getting absolutely hammered in the process.
Typos when posting from a phone is not a sign of education.
Not just the typos, but your general butchering of the English language as well. I post from a phone most of the time and my posts don't read like a 4 year old with autism.
Confirmation bias lol. I am the guy in this board who least accepts the common misconceptions.
When said reports are beneficial to the team, sure. This thread is a great example of that.
Your entire posting. I said I see no reason for him to lie and you turned into Richard Simmons at an all you can eat buffet.
Yeah, this doesn't work. I need a quote and a link from this thread where I called him a liar. Hell, it shouldn't be that hard. You only need to go back two or three pages where he dropped that nugget. Otherwise, should we just assume that you have nothing on that front and that insinuation was nothing more than your usual straw-manning?
My argument is based upon what I said that you went all 11 year old girl on.
The pint remains this discussion had always been about my comment that when he says he trusts his source I see no reason why he would lie.
You have gone in every direction except explaining why you think he would.
Horrific reading comprehension once again. Let me spell it out for you, since you're a bit slow on the uptake again today:
Not knowing SBB and wanting further clarification or proof on what he's saying from other sources =/= me thinking that he's lying. Honestly, Andy, when you need to begin to construct logical fallacies in order to have an argument, you might want to do some soul searching.
You embarrassed yourself. I’m just cleaning up the mess.
Not really. I laughed at your lack of logic and use of confirmation bias and you got butthurt. Then you made a mess as a result. It's a typical AndyJohnson pissing contest thread-killer.
Of course. Media had agendas. Haven’t you noticed that? I introduce you to John tomase and Chris Mortensen.
What reason would this poster have to lie?
Of course they do. People have agendas in general. News at 11. That still doesn't explain why you would think that the general media member (this includes the good ones that have reported negative things about the team in the past) would have a reason to lie while citing unnamed sources when they have to put their name and face behind the report while accepting a faceless name's word on a message board as absolute truth while "not seeing that he has a reason to lie". It's a complete and utter failure in logic.
So you have nothing on that front either, then. Got it. I figured that would be the case since the sentence read as if you had a grand mal seizure as you were typing it.
That’s a load of crap. Personal attacks are your calling card.
After I've been attacked? Sure. Especially after a *****y, passive-aggressive one that you started this convo with. You crying about it now is high comedy, though.
And with that im done. There is no point in taking this any further, what happened is obvious.
Lmfao. Sure you are. But yeah, what happened is obvious. You exercised some hardcore confirmation bias, I thought it was funny, and you got butthurt and decided to write a doctoral thesis about it with mostly useless logical fallacies, passive-aggressive ad hominem, and word salad. Just another day at the office, I suppose.
