| > Yes I don’t believe in unbiased sources. I believe in multiple perspectives revealing aspects of the truth. Do you believe in priors? Or do you evaluate each perspective at its face value? > Correct. And I don’t buy the dichotomy you are framing of biased companies vs unbiased government. That's not the dichotomy here. It's a biased government acting on behalf of biased companies. > The term “objective truth” was just thrown around. Might as well just say it’s an “absolutely good”. The level of discourse in these threads is science = good, agency with science in name = science. Cuts against agency = bad. The only discourse you personally have contributed is "both sides." > What are the costs and benefits to this organization? It appears some sub threads have identified a possible overlap with other agency’s responsibility. It would be interesting to know the extent that is true. Sounds like you are intentionally giving benefit of doubt to well-known bad faith actors. This makes you incredibly naive at best, or biased sealioner at worst. |
Sounds like you are reasoning with emotional labels and not information.