DebunkThis

1072 readers

1 users here now

Debunking pseudoscience, myths, and spurious hogwash since 2010.

We are an evidence-based Reddit/Lemmy community dedicated to taking an objective look at questionable theories, dodgy news sources, bold-faced claims, and suspicious studies.

Community Rules:

Posting

Title formatting on all posts should be "Debunk This: [main claim]"

Example: "Debunk This: Chemicals in the water are turning the frogs gay."

All posts must include at least one source and one to three specific claims to be debunked, so commenters know exactly what to investigate.

Example: "According to this YouTube video, dihydrogen monoxide turns amphibians homosexual. Is this true? Also, did Albert Einstein really claim this?"

NSFW/NSFL content is not allowed.

Commenting

Always try to back up your comments with linked sources. Just saying "this is untrue" isn't all that helpful without facts to support it.

Standard community rules apply regarding spam, self-promotion, personal attacks and hate speech, etc.

Links

Suggested Fediverse Communities

• RFK Jr. Watch @lemm.ee - Discuss misinformation being spread by antivaxxer politician, Robert F Kennedy Jr.
• Skeptic @lemmy.world - Discuss pseudoscience, quackery, and bald-faced BS
• Skeptic @kbin.social - The above, just on Kbin
• Science Communication @mander.xyz - Discuss science literacy and media reporting

Useful Resources

• Common examples of misleading graphs - How to spot dodgy infographics
• Metabunk.org - a message board dedicated to debunking popular conspiracies
• Media Bias / Fact Check - Great resource for current news fact checking + checking a source's political bias
• Science Based Medicine - A scientific look at current issues and controversies
• Deplatform Disease - A medical blog that specifically counters anti-COVID-vaccine claims
• Respectful Insolence - David Gorsky's blog on antivax shenanigans, politics, and pseudoscience

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1409

Debunk this: Things that happen while Ronald Reagan was a US President (i.imgur.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

195 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] [email protected] -15 points 8 months ago (14 children)

Which came thru Arkansas while Clinton was governor. Not defending Ollie since he is human garbage.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago (10 children)

The cocaine came through Arkansas and Clinton had something to do with it? You got a source for this?

[+] [email protected] -13 points 8 months ago (7 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Seal?wprov=sfla1

https://www.judicialwatch.org/guns-drugs-cia-at-mena-arkansas-judicial-watch-demands-answers/

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/0001289860

[–] [email protected] 32 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Wow, did you read any of that. Ctl-f "Clinton " in that wiki article. Zero.

Judicial Watch (great source) is trying crazy hard in that article to suggest that judicial watch is saying there is a connection but they seem have nothing. Serious, they reference themselfs. It reads like a twelve year old with a clear bias wrote it. He was governor at the time. If you want to claim more, show real evidence. Your feeling don't count, snowflake.

[+] [email protected] -20 points 8 months ago (3 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

You’re affirming that your statement regarding Bill Clinton is a meaningless inclusion.

Then why include it in your comment at all?

I’d love to know!
Please tell me why you thought a statement that strung unrelated pieces of information together without establishing a relationship between them or drawing a conclusion about their relationship was a worthwhile contribution to the discourse.

When pressed, you linked to sources without elaborating your position or reason for linking to them.
Was that intentional? Did you mean to give any person who might engage with you a completely blank slate, in which you could then simply accuse them of arguing against something you had not actually asserted?
Bait them into making a straw man argument, and insinuate that validates the premise you still have not stated?

I am curious how this conversation thread would have gone if you had actually stated your premise so others could dismiss it as its own logical fallacy: correlation is not causation.
But noooo, I had to read through someone putting forth genuine effort to call you on your nonsense while you offered low quality, dishonest responses that use the same sort of shifty rhetorical techniques that “journalists” employ on rage-bait news-otainment TV programs.

And then - after the self-adulatory statements, pseudo-intellectual nonsense, and pointless insults - you claim the links you shared which do not support your implied premise are proof that you have adequately supported your not-claims? Weak.