This is a live hangout to meet other online users, discuss random stuff or schedule future debates.
If you're online and want to just have a chat with other online QO users, jump right in and join the discussion! (or if you're the first one here, go ahead and kick it off, other online users will likely join you a few minutes after u go live)
If anyone would like a very thorough and complete explanation on the case for skepticism in regards to the Russian hoax please let me know as I'd be happy to walk you through the entire thing from beginning to end and answer any questions that you might have.
The case for skepticism is rock solid and can't be rationally disputed by anyone in a logically consistent way (I can demonstrate that you're not able to hold the standard consistently and that you're making special exceptions due to personal biases). If you've been duped by the lying media into believing in this hoax, I think I can convince you to be more skeptical of the official narrative and why it doesn't make sense either on the face of it or especially when you subject the conspiracy theory to even a minimal amount of rational scrutiny. I can help walk you through this issue and explain why some explanations are better than others, and why the totality of evidence is firmly on one side of this issue.
Now I realize this may not be transparently obvious to some of you, because in order to know certain basic facts about this case you have to be willing to swallow the pill and read a lot of conservative media such as Breitbart, Fox News, and other more obscure outlets, but luckily for you I've done that so you don't have to. I've spent over a year researching this issue almost religiously. I've been through every twist and turn, constantly trying to prove my theory wrong and find counter-evidence against my assumptions, but the harder you look the more it just stacks up against the conspiracy theory.
I think it makes most sense to just lay out all the *FACTS* of the case (not speculation) and then see how that compares to overall narrative/story. What you will find is that the official media narrative can't really be reconciled with even the most basic facts about this case. If we removed "Trump" and replaced it with "Obama" you would quickly see how silly and preposterous this entire thing is. In fact, I think that because it's Trump, that's the only reason anyone believes in this story at all. I think if Obama were accused of precisely the same thing given the *EXACT* same standard of evidence, nobody would believe it. People would take one look at the evidence that *does* exist and say this is bullshit. They wouldn't be saying "well there is some secret evidence that nobody has seen, we don't really know, we have to wait." Most rational people would come to the only rational conclusion here, which is that it's entirely bullshit and you've been duped.
@bronsonkaahui See if Daniel ( @sharkb8 ) wants in on this....he has been a big proponent of why we need Mueller (and he appears to not be worried about how unethical lots of the people on the Mueller team are!) Mention all the un-investigated (or poorly investigated) things pertaining to Hillary - and he deflects. I wonder if his eyes have been opened with the new facts coming out.
@mvineyard well as I said I can, at a very minimum, demonstrate logical inconsistency. For some people (non-intellectuals) that's generally not an issue.
@madmike yes, a series of events in which conscious actors were making decisions which affected outcomes. So yeah, our current state is affected by other things, but among those things are the decisions that conscious actors made in the past.
@phearl3ss1 Could you pull your mic closer or maybe put in head phones to hear what the others are saying. I think that would clear up your mic issues.
Objective morality is only possible through a universal moral authority. There might be an objective morality, but it would be physical in nature and would not be universal.
The point here is that yes, the government is, in fact, preventing Americans from buying drugs from other countries and this artifiicially increases the prices of those drugs.
What's ironic about this whole thing is that Trump was leading the charge against the pharmaceutical industry on the campaign trail which went completely unnoticed by the media because they were too distracted calling him a racist and saying he couldn't win on these kinds of economic messages that actually do resonate with people.
@benmouse42 here is a summary on general libertarian theory of how, specifically, the government is the primary reason why medical care is so expensive in the United States.
Here is an example of a free market alternative which has somehow managed to take root WITHIN the current system, which is remarkable. It's the only hospital in the country which openly displays prices (this is probably similar to how you suggested drugs are sold in Australia, where they're not legally allowed to hide the true costs).
@change_my_mind@sharkb8@liamm@the_chosen_one I draw the line at whatever the government is allowed to have. If you accept that some people should be allowed to have these things then you have no rational basis in which to say they should be limited only to certain people.
@change_my_mind@sharkb8@liamm@the_chosen_one I don't get how people can defend the idea that ONLY some people should have these weapons. That doesn't make sense to me. Either people should have them or they shouldn't. Because we don't have much evidence demonstrating that governments are more responsible with weapons, on average, than normal people (I can't conceive of something like WW2 happening in the absence of governments), it seems to be a good a priori case against government having these things in the first place.
But you accept that. You've ceded that these weapons should exist. Thus, the burden is on you to show they should be limited to those who have them.
@sharkb8 how many FFA holders with machine guns have actually killed people with these weapons compared to government? I can't think of any. Machine guns weren't even illegal till the mid 20th century when you could still order them in a magazine.
@sharkb8 sorry I was outside but listening on my headphones. To clarify I support nuclear disarmament worldwide so it is incorrect to say I think people SHOULD have nuclear weapons. I'm saying that given YOU believe some people should have them (governments), what is the rational basis to say it should be limited to these certain people?
@bronsonkaahui I love the way in that it thinks things through rather than shoving it into a mathematical model. Its makes it easier to teach and more interesting and easier for people to understand. I've met so many people with Econ degrees from UW who can't tell you anything about what they supposed to have learned. Its because they drill the interesting parts out and simplify it to mathematical application (I have a BA in Math)
@turi People come in and go here as they like :-) You might want to leave a message on our Facebook Head-2-Head Group that you are on the lounge and someone will join. Here is the link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/QallOutH2H/
I really thank qallout . I m a student currently appeared the board exam and during my vacation I wanted to do do something creative and interesting .as I liked debating when I knew about this website I came up and it was really helpful and interesting for me and this hangout area is one of my favourite.
@mani_bharathy That was not my argument. The idea is that she was always female, and is relieving pain with the surgery. We can have a discussion about this at some point if you want.
Hi folks.... I think under the umbrella of secularism.. People are forcing a religion on people who are atheist or have other beliefs. In Asian countries, people in the name of Jehad or Allah are killing masses and spreading animosity.
Welcome to the QallOut Lounge!
..see moreThis is a live hangout to meet other online users, discuss random stuff or schedule future debates.
If you're online and want to just have a chat with other online QO users, jump right in and join the discussion! (or if you're the first one here, go ahead and kick it off, other online users will likely join you a few minutes after u go live)
@qallout How do we watch these?
..see more@madmike these are for hop on, hop off .. to hangout with others online, not much to watch or replay ..
..see more@qallout oh ok. I thought it was recorded like the debates. Thanks for responding so quickly
..see more@madmike they do btw, we r just,fixing it
..see more@sharkb8 is a cucc
..see more@the_chosen_one *Beta Cuck
..see morethings just turned creepy real quick
..see moreGtg y'all, nice talking!
..see morewe do have pauline hanson thou
..see moreWhere do these videos end up?
..see more@bronsonkaahui they don't end up saved, it's just a hangout area
..see more@bronsonkaahui https://www.qallout.com/debate/4195-discussion-about-abortion-and-the-way-we-approach-this-issue
..see morehttps://www.qallout.com/debate/4035-social-media-has-done-more-harm-than-good-to-social-justice-movements-queens-vs-western-tournament-round-3-at-3-pm-est
..see moreIf anyone would like a very thorough and complete explanation on the case for skepticism in regards to the Russian hoax please let me know as I'd be happy to walk you through the entire thing from beginning to end and answer any questions that you might have.
..see moreThe case for skepticism is rock solid and can't be rationally disputed by anyone in a logically consistent way (I can demonstrate that you're not able to hold the standard consistently and that you're making special exceptions due to personal biases). If you've been duped by the lying media into believing in this hoax, I think I can convince you to be more skeptical of the official narrative and why it doesn't make sense either on the face of it or especially when you subject the conspiracy theory to even a minimal amount of rational scrutiny. I can help walk you through this issue and explain why some explanations are better than others, and why the totality of evidence is firmly on one side of this issue.
Now I realize this may not be transparently obvious to some of you, because in order to know certain basic facts about this case you have to be willing to swallow the pill and read a lot of conservative media such as Breitbart, Fox News, and other more obscure outlets, but luckily for you I've done that so you don't have to. I've spent over a year researching this issue almost religiously. I've been through every twist and turn, constantly trying to prove my theory wrong and find counter-evidence against my assumptions, but the harder you look the more it just stacks up against the conspiracy theory.
I think it makes most sense to just lay out all the *FACTS* of the case (not speculation) and then see how that compares to overall narrative/story. What you will find is that the official media narrative can't really be reconciled with even the most basic facts about this case. If we removed "Trump" and replaced it with "Obama" you would quickly see how silly and preposterous this entire thing is. In fact, I think that because it's Trump, that's the only reason anyone believes in this story at all. I think if Obama were accused of precisely the same thing given the *EXACT* same standard of evidence, nobody would believe it. People would take one look at the evidence that *does* exist and say this is bullshit. They wouldn't be saying "well there is some secret evidence that nobody has seen, we don't really know, we have to wait." Most rational people would come to the only rational conclusion here, which is that it's entirely bullshit and you've been duped.
@bronsonkaahui See if Daniel ( @sharkb8 ) wants in on this....he has been a big proponent of why we need Mueller (and he appears to not be worried about how unethical lots of the people on the Mueller team are!) Mention all the un-investigated (or poorly investigated) things pertaining to Hillary - and he deflects. I wonder if his eyes have been opened with the new facts coming out.
..see more@mvineyard well as I said I can, at a very minimum, demonstrate logical inconsistency. For some people (non-intellectuals) that's generally not an issue.
..see more:( Yaz took my seat lol
..see more@bronsonkaahui You can have mine, I'll drop out I need to research anyway.
..see more@mvineyard also known as the "Gish Gallop."
..see more@josh808 which part of the island you live on?
..see morehttps://www.qallout.com/u/imperatortruth
..see more@alot_like_locke what happened?
..see more@bronsonkaahui Battery died lol
..see moreanyone up for a convo?
..see more@selahozshalom me :O
..see morePHILO DISCUSSION: Free will, the ability to make conscious decisions/choices that can affect outcomes. @behind_the_veil_of_ignorance
..see more@sharkb8 @citizenthom @madmike
..see more@madmike yes, a series of events in which conscious actors were making decisions which affected outcomes. So yeah, our current state is affected by other things, but among those things are the decisions that conscious actors made in the past.
..see more@citizenthom Romans 13 = invention by Paul.
..see more@citizenthom you just hit me right in my Christian heart. People are important. I love knowledge but probably shouldn't.
..see more@bronsonkaahui you can join back in
..see more@debateme13 it's full, lol
..see more@sharkb8 @bronsonkaahui
..see moreWhat are you guys doing awake?????!!!!
@gigi join us. I'll be up for 15 mins.
..see morehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLDE4mRwfSQ&t=98s
..see morehttps://www.theassemblage.com/index.php
..see morewhat a bunch of cucks
..see morethat was fun for my first debate
..see more@phearl3ss1 You should jump back on.
..see more@phearl3ss1 Could you pull your mic closer or maybe put in head phones to hear what the others are saying. I think that would clear up your mic issues.
..see moreObjective morality is only possible through a universal moral authority. There might be an objective morality, but it would be physical in nature and would not be universal.
..see moreReality exists. Our perception of reality is subjective
..see moreI think you guys need to differentiate between universal and objective
..see moreSo God is irrational, by definition. I can get behind that.
..see more@madmike lol
..see more@ben @the_chosen_one @sigfried @bronsonkaahui If you're gonna talk anarchism you'd better let me in for a minute.
..see more@citizenthom you = Christian anarchist?
..see moreThere's totally a Fish God. His name is Shark.
..see moreHALLIBURTON
..see moreSomalia didn't exist without a government. There were multiple groups trying to BE the government.
..see more@citizenthom still want in?
..see more@the_chosen_one yes
..see more@citizenthom all you
..see morehey no one is online here
..see moreFor some reason it wouldn't let me tag you guys. These videos are a response to our conversation last night regarding anarcho capitalism.
..see more@sigfried @ben @the_chosen_one
@phearl3ss1
..see morehttp://reformedlibertarian.com/articles/theology/romans-13/
..see more@yaz is there any way we can get a video from 7:40 PM to 8:41 PM tonight?
..see more@gigi
..see more@bronsonkaahui Did you get it?
..see more@logicalreason no...
..see more@bronsonkaahui Let me back in the debate I started dammit! Somoeone step down!
..see moreLet me back in
..see morehttp://www.fdareview.org/05_harm.php
..see more@benmouse42
..see more@benmouse42 the case for abolishing patents which I mentioned earlier.
..see morehttps://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/the-case-for-abolishing-patents-yes-all-of-them/262913/
@benmouse42 here was our conversation regarding whether or not Americans can buy cheaper drugs from Canada:
..see morehttps://newrepublic.com/minutes/139820/cory-bookers-explanation-voting-cheap-prescription-drugs-doesnt-track
Booker eventually backed down from his "safety" bullshit argument and jumped on board.
..see morehttps://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/cory-booker-bernie-sanders-drug-re-importation_us_58b5a8ade4b060480e0c2b52
The point here is that yes, the government is, in fact, preventing Americans from buying drugs from other countries and this artifiicially increases the prices of those drugs.
What's ironic about this whole thing is that Trump was leading the charge against the pharmaceutical industry on the campaign trail which went completely unnoticed by the media because they were too distracted calling him a racist and saying he couldn't win on these kinds of economic messages that actually do resonate with people.
..see morehttps://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/democrats-rush-to-prove-trump-right-on-big-pharma_us_5877edd4e4b0b3c7a7b05c29
@benmouse42 here is a summary on general libertarian theory of how, specifically, the government is the primary reason why medical care is so expensive in the United States.
..see morehttps://mises.org/blog/how-government-regulations-made-healthcare-so-expensive
Here is an example of a free market alternative which has somehow managed to take root WITHIN the current system, which is remarkable. It's the only hospital in the country which openly displays prices (this is probably similar to how you suggested drugs are sold in Australia, where they're not legally allowed to hide the true costs).
..see morehttp://time.com/4649914/why-the-doctor-takes-only-cash/
@logicalreason can you accept my debate challenge?
..see moreLink: https://www.qallout.com/debate/4551-the-roast-game-is-fact-families-were-eating-their-own-children
@change_my_mind @sharkb8 @liamm @the_chosen_one I draw the line at whatever the government is allowed to have. If you accept that some people should be allowed to have these things then you have no rational basis in which to say they should be limited only to certain people.
..see moreI agree, I support unliateral and global nuclear disarmament. So you can't claim the moral high ground here.
..see more@change_my_mind @sharkb8 @liamm @the_chosen_one I don't get how people can defend the idea that ONLY some people should have these weapons. That doesn't make sense to me. Either people should have them or they shouldn't. Because we don't have much evidence demonstrating that governments are more responsible with weapons, on average, than normal people (I can't conceive of something like WW2 happening in the absence of governments), it seems to be a good a priori case against government having these things in the first place.
..see moreBut you accept that. You've ceded that these weapons should exist. Thus, the burden is on you to show they should be limited to those who have them.
@sharkb8 how many FFA holders with machine guns have actually killed people with these weapons compared to government? I can't think of any. Machine guns weren't even illegal till the mid 20th century when you could still order them in a magazine.
..see more@liamm I am ready for war on this discussion ^_^
..see more@liamm "No guns"
..see moreWould you disarm the government? Yes/no?
@sharkb8 sorry I was outside but listening on my headphones. To clarify I support nuclear disarmament worldwide so it is incorrect to say I think people SHOULD have nuclear weapons. I'm saying that given YOU believe some people should have them (governments), what is the rational basis to say it should be limited to these certain people?
..see more@Sharkb8 I do
..see more@The_chosen_one I'd prefer feminism/SJW over cancer of course, because I'm a father and I not being facetious.
..see moreWhat are we talking about today?
..see moreYou guys make my liberal heart hurt
..see more@qallout is it possible to reverse the comment display, so new comments are on top for these lounge debates?
..see morelol. I'm surprised you didn't say a Theocracy was better....
..see more@madmike cuz theocracy is shiiiiiit
..see moreYou guys need less Jesus.
..see moreAt least one of you isn't a horrible person. lol
..see moreall fifty babies would die.
..see moreIf you put 10,000 babies on an island, all 10,000 would die. They are babies.
..see moreThis has happened countless time in non human species. This isn't difficult to understand.
..see moreBecause evolution has been working on humans for a long time. Like, a really long time.
..see moreYou know the culture shift started 60 years ago, and is only now getting to the military
..see moreIt's probably better that I'm not in this discussion
..see moreExcept for all those males in power that sexually harass women. lol
..see moreProlife, Except for all those people that have already been born.
..see moreOH GAWD SOMEONE MENTIONED CUSTODY ISSUES. LET THE LAWYER IN.
..see moreSo @yaz, what is the annual cost we would need to raise in order to keep the site operational?
..see moreI don't have a concrete solution to offer but Qallout is full of wonders and I would want this platform to live for ages.
..see moreMAGA,
..see more@citizenthom the quality of the debaters also really really improved over the later half of the year, since a lot of competitive debaters joined.
..see more@the_chosen_one is absolutely Qallout's most improved debater.
..see more@sharkb8
..see more@sharkb8 It's a tough call between Chandler and Terrance I think.. :-)
..see more@gigi just like our debate :D
..see more@nellyj_misesian didn't realize you were an Austrian.
..see more@sigfried tautology is the word you're looking for.
..see morehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_egoism
@bronsonkaahui I love the way in that it thinks things through rather than shoving it into a mathematical model. Its makes it easier to teach and more interesting and easier for people to understand. I've met so many people with Econ degrees from UW who can't tell you anything about what they supposed to have learned. Its because they drill the interesting parts out and simplify it to mathematical application (I have a BA in Math)
..see morehttps://www.gmu.edu/centers/publicchoice/faculty%20pages/Tyler/rationality.pdf
..see moreHe says the Austrian Econ Theories have some great contributions so in no way does he simply dismiss it offhand
..see morehttp://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm
Rebuttal Links
https://mises.org/blog/caplan-and-responses
Bahhhh fuck it my shitty 4g not good enough I guess Im out.
..see moreIm at Ala Moana Park didnt realize how shitty the service is here.
..see moreIm logged in
..see morehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
..see moresorry
..see moreno people here though
..see more@turi People come in and go here as they like :-) You might want to leave a message on our Facebook Head-2-Head Group that you are on the lounge and someone will join. Here is the link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/QallOutH2H/
..see moreDemocracyy is a curse for india
..see moreI can't hear any audio...?
..see morei agree with @alot_like_locke
..see moreI support Micheal here!
..see moreI think Syria is the new Russia for Bronson
..see more@the_chosen_one in terms of not believing in bullshit? That's issue-independent.
..see morehttps://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/11/world/middleeast/syria-chemical-attack.html
..see morehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSXwG-901yU
..see moreI really thank qallout . I m a student currently appeared the board exam and during my vacation I wanted to do do something creative and interesting .as I liked debating when I knew about this website I came up and it was really helpful and interesting for me and this hangout area is one of my favourite.
..see moreHow to watch a head to head debate live
..see moreConstitutional Monarchy > Democracy
..see moreA god does not exist.
..see moreFr Campbell blvd. Charlie’s steakhouse
..see morecan i hope on?
..see more@kyrothehero Give me 15 mins, i will join
..see more@prathit_singh awesome, see you then
..see more@sigfried https://www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf
..see moreCorruption is a root cause of country's failure
..see moreTaking about India's education system
..see moreOh there are humans here?
..see morehttps://www.youtube.com...
..see morehttps://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article212762209.html
..see morehttps://www.politicalcompass.org/test
..see more@pseudonym Since we have talked about gender in our debate, I'll take the
..see moreT from LGBT for an example.
Why don't transgender makes sense ?
A man who wants to be a women goes to a doctor, cut his penis, set up a vagina like thing, comes out and say now he is a women
Do you think that he is changed to female? Isn't it absurd to think that way
@mani_bharathy That was not my argument. The idea is that she was always female, and is relieving pain with the surgery. We can have a discussion about this at some point if you want.
..see more@pseudonym Sure. I'm always ready for discussion. Ping me whenever you are free
..see more@mani_bharathy If you're on right now, I can talk
..see moreIs abortion murder
..see moreI think your video froze..
..see more@gigi Are tournaments still a thing?
..see moreWhy do we say time is money
..see moreHi folks.... I think under the umbrella of secularism.. People are forcing a religion on people who are atheist or have other beliefs. In Asian countries, people in the name of Jehad or Allah are killing masses and spreading animosity.
..see morenobody is ever on here
..see more@jba108 i suggest you engage at the Qallout head-2-head FB Group to check if there is anyone up for louge!
..see morehttps://elephrame.com/textbook/BLM
..see moreLet's debate about anything ?
..see moreanybody up?
..see moreGod exists
..see moreAnybody?
..see moreJews
..see moreAnyone?
..see moreHello ?
..see moreAnyone want to chat?
..see morehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzyg9z4L55Y
..see morehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZYQpge1W5s
..see moreAre you here nellyjmisesean?
..see morehello
..see moreI am here.
..see moreIf BMI's would come to replace the language as our communication tool, a huge part of our culture would die.
..see moreAnyone up for convo?
..see moreid loved to have a discussion about politics or religion
..see moreif anyone is willing
..see more