I find it odd to call remarks "outrageous". This sounds like a testable hypothesis. Why, post-Enlightenment, would anyone ever choose to take the Dark Age path of being outraged when they can instead gather data and test a hypothesis? Sad. https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1115926643799932929 …
-
-
Because if the latter, then you've constructed an airtight ideological / epistemological bubble that forces you to ignore EVERYTHING from outside, because you already know the truth. ...which seems fairly totalitarian / anti-Enlightenment, no?
-
And, tact #2 on this: if the case against his stance is so strong, why was it necessary to massage the quote by deleting 2/3 of it and capitalizing a word to hide the edit? Deception seems like a strategy of weakness, not strength.pic.twitter.com/396NDYi7vJ
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.