Evidence for God from Science

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amtXwRD ... e=youtu.be

From the clip:

Project Veritas has released a video of CNN Producer John Bonifield who was caught on hidden-camera admitting that there is no proof to CNN’s Russia narrative.

“I mean, it’s mostly [nonsense] right now,” Bonifield says. “Like, we don’t have any giant proof.”

He confirms that the driving factor at CNN is ratings:

“It’s a business, people are like the media has an ethical phssssss…All the nice cutesy little ethics that used to get talked about in journalism school you’re just like, that’s adorable. That’s adorable. This is a business.”
According to the CNN Producer, business is booming. “Trump is good for business right now,” he concluded.

“You have no smoking gun, no real proof”.

It is an interesting interview that, if nothing else, confirms that CNN is focused on going after trump for ratings because of their liberal viewership.
This coupled with the latest silliness of releasing that fake news story about Trump and Russia, pretty much solidifies that CNN is not a true NEWS agency.

Yeah we all knew this already, but this should confirm it for the liberals out there.

Although I wouldn't put it past Ed to somehow defend what the man said

I'm not going to defend that guy or CNN, but I'm not going to take a piece of edited video from Project Veritas at face value, either. James O'Keefe is a partisan hack. If he said the sky was blue I'd question it.

edwardmurphy wrote:I'm not going to defend that guy or CNN, but I'm not going to take a piece of edited video from Project Veritas at face value, either. James O'Keefe is a partisan hack. If he said the sky was blue I'd question it.

Probably the way conservatives feel about CNN, LOL !

edwardmurphy wrote:I'm not going to defend that guy or CNN, but I'm not going to take a piece of edited video from Project Veritas at face value, either. James O'Keefe is a partisan hack. If he said the sky was blue I'd question it.

and he writes it off due to the author. Truly amazing. I underestimated you.

Not even video with spoken words will convince a die hard like you.

edwardmurphy wrote:I'm not going to defend that guy or CNN, but I'm not going to take a piece of edited video from Project Veritas at face value, either. James O'Keefe is a partisan hack. If he said the sky was blue I'd question it.

And there's the bias you can't see in yourself. You don't believe truth or facts, if you don't like the person saying it.

Rick: And there's the bias you can't see in yourself. You don't believe truth or facts, if you don't like the person saying it.

BING freakin' O!

So a partisan political activist know for using subterfuge, hidden cameras, and selective editing to discredit organizations he dislikes releases some edited video and you figure it's time to do a touchdown dance? Pardon my skepticism, but the guy has a history of using edits to distort events until they fit his narrative. So sure, I have some biases. One of them is that I distrust liars. I'll withhold judgement until I see the raw video. If he doesn't release it I'll assume it's because he's lying again.

edwardmurphy wrote:So a partisan political activist know for using subterfuge, hidden cameras, and selective editing to discredit organizations he dislikes releases some edited video and you figure it's time to do a touchdown dance? Pardon my skepticism, but the guy has a history of using edits to distort events until they fit his narrative. So sure, I have some biases. One of them is that I distrust liars. I'll withhold judgement until I see the raw video. If he doesn't release it I'll assume it's because he's lying again.

Holy crap, that sounds like what mainstream media does with the likes of Milo and Alex Jones and so many others !!

So, is FoxNews or other conservative sources "sinless" in playing to their publics, per the marketing of stories that excite their listeners - often not. Fact is, everyone should call these issues as they truly are - meaning, be an equal-opportunity critic - including sources you normally like. If we'd all do that, the fake news would be far less a problem. If all we ever hear from a reporter are all good things and never any criticism, or all bad things and never any positives, about a public figure - really, one should question the objectivity, because people are complex. Sometimes that guy who really irritates you says some meaningful or truthful thing.

What Bonefield said - "“It’s a business, people are like the media has an ethical phssssss…All the nice cutesy little ethics that used to get talked about in journalism school you’re just like, that’s adorable. That’s adorable. This is a business.”
According to the CNN Producer, business is booming. “Trump is good for business right now," - you could apply that to all stripes of media, at one time or the other. Media companies are in business to make money. Period! The owners and investors of media companies don't have "journalist ethics" - what they care about is the bottom line: $$$. And these companies well know the general demographics and sensibilities of their listeners - meaning, they're gonna keep feeding them more of what most interests them AND appeals to their political leanings. So, once you are in such an organization, it becomes increasingly difficult to refuse to air stories that are like "red meat" to their listeners - it's like passing up an opportunity to keep that audience's attention, interest and view up. Of course, networks vett their broadcasters for political leanings - often making them less objective. And, of course, those in the news rooms want to please their overlords and their accountants, and are under tremendous pressure to do so. Every single news network has some version of the above comment: "__________ is good for business!" Just like most people aren't always good or always bad, neither are media outlets.

Best solution to avoid fake news - criticize those you typically agree with whenever you KNOW they are unquestionably wrong. People need accountability from their friends. Journalists need criticism from those who generally like them. Otherwise, all they'll ever hear are vocal pats on the back. And thus there will be no pressure on the owners to strive for reporting integrity.

Alex Jones says outrageous, offensive things constantly and deliberately. It's part of his shtick. There's no need to quote him out of context to make him look like a lunatic. Milo was similar, although he went with smugly self-satisfied rather than bat crap crazy, but his demise came when the conservatives kicked him out of the fold. I'm not sure who you mean by "so many others" but I've often seen it used as filler for when you're out of examples but you wish you weren't. Is that what's happening here, Paul?

BTW, just so we're clear, I'm still not defending that CNN producer or his network. CNN is crap and I take their reporting with a grain of salt. In fact, I take all narratives and talking points with a grain of salt. None of that makes James O'Keefe the least bit credible.

And yet, based upon such grains of salt you and I believe DB were quite adamant Trump would be impeached.

Edit: found the discussion about such - http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 30&t=41885

I still think he'll be impeached sooner or later, but I haven't set a date or picked a reason. This isn't a prophecy, just a hunch. There are a lot of grains of salt out there and they're all being investigated. And there are probably plenty more to be found. Trump is a shady guy who instinctively does shady things and surrounds himself with shady people. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. His low popularity numbers are a factor, as is his distracting behavior and the impact it's having on McConnell and Ryan's attempts to move the Republican agenda forward. He was willing to risk obstruction of justice - assuming that he understood the risk he was taking - for Mike Flynn. What will he do if Jared Kushner gets jammed up?

So anyway, yeah, I still expect him to get impeached, but it's not because of any one story or any one news source.

edwardmurphy wrote:Alex Jones says outrageous, offensive things constantly and deliberately. It's part of his shtick. There's no need to quote him out of context to make him look like a lunatic. Milo was similar, although he went with smugly self-satisfied rather than bat crap crazy, but his demise came when the conservatives kicked him out of the fold. I'm not sure who you mean by "so many others" but I've often seen it used as filler for when you're out of examples but you wish you weren't. Is that what's happening here, Paul?

BTW, just so we're clear, I'm still not defending that CNN producer or his network. CNN is crap and I take their reporting with a grain of salt. In fact, I take all narratives and talking points with a grain of salt. None of that makes James O'Keefe the least bit credible.

I am just pointing out the bias you have which, I am sure, you are aware of.
Just like we all do.

Sure, I have my biases. As you said, everybody does. But I don't think that being skeptical of James O'Keefe is liberal bias, I think it's critical thinking. The guy has been caught using misleading edits to back up a false narrative. He's lost in court and had to pay damages for it. His lack of credibility is a product of his past behavior, not his political views.