MIT Analysis Shows 69,000 Trump Votes Flipped to Biden in Michigan

Author: 3RU7AL
Ethics
Philosophy
logiczombie
intp
Information War

Posts

Total: 74
Topic's author
#31
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
We're not arguing with the Dr. Ayyadurai here, we are arguing against your use of such a notoriously bogus source.
And you're doing quite a fine job of it as well.

Look, I don't give a flying flip about who the hell said it.

All I know is that a horde of rabid Trumpists are out for blood and the American election system has no redundant integrity checks.

Telling the horde "you're a bunch of dumb conspiracy nuts" isn't going to calm them down. 

In-fact, it's been proven to make them even more rabid.

I appreciate the links you provided that very specifically addressed the apparent statistical anomalies.

I am forever indebted to you.
Topic's author
#32
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Remember this quote the next time a politician in Authority tells you to "listen to the science and trust it"
Trust the science (only after rigorous peer review), distrust the scientist.
#33
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@3RU7AL
All I know is that a horde of rabid Trumpists are out for blood and the American election system has no redundant integrity checks.

Well the Trumpists are out for blood but it is quite false that the American system has no redundant integrity checks.  Let's note that it also Trumpists who were largely in charge of election security this time around.  Trump's administration has already declared this election the most secure in US history, largely because there was so much concern about foreign interference, in spite of Trump's claim to the contrary.  It's like a fire department quickly and safely extinguishing a house fire in spite of the Fire Marshall's constantly running 5 gallon cans of gasoline into the house while tweeting out that the rafters are aflame.




Topic's author
#34
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
It's like a fire department quickly and safely extinguishing a house fire in spite of the Fire Marshall's constantly running 5 gallon cans of gasoline into the house while tweeting out that the rafters are aflame.
Well stated.
#35
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,674
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@3RU7AL
is this fraud or what?
#36
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
What
#37
Death23
Death23's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 618
3
4
7
Death23's avatar
Death23
3
4
7
-->
@3RU7AL
Your source also did this:

During the COVID-19 pandemic Ayyadurai used social media to spread various conspiracy theories and misinformation about the pandemic.[citation needed] In January 2020 he claimed that the coronavirus was patented by the Pirbright Institute, but the patent he referenced relates to avian coronavirus, which infects birds, not SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the pandemic.[51] Ayyadurai defined COVID-19 as "an overactive dysfunctional immune system that overreacts and that's what causes damage to the body", and claimed that vitamin C could be used to treat it.[52]He alleged that the coronavirus was spread by the "deep state" and accused Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, of being a "Deep State Plant". Ayyadurai called for Fauci to be fired[53] and his supporters lobbied for Fauci to be replaced by Ayyadurai.[54]In March 2020 he published an open letter to president Donald Trump where he wrote that a national lockdown was unnecessary and advocated that large doses of vitamins could prevent and cure the disease.[55] In April 2020, Politico and Vanity Fair reported that QAnon supporter DeAnna Lorraine recommended that Shiva be included in coronavirus discussions at Donald Trump's White House.[56][57]

Credibility low.
#38
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,674
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Theweakeredge
what?
#39
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Well, you asked:

is this fraud or what?
I'm saying, as this conversation is proving, that it's clearly not voter fraud, so the answer to your question must be what.
#40
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,674
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Theweakeredge
it is voter fraud, this election was stolen
#41
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Prove it
#42
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
That is what our courts are for. Due process is a right of every American citizen, from President  Trump to Justice Kavenaugh.
#43
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@3RU7AL
Good thread: So you see that logical precision only frustrates poor thinkers.

Big minds focus on Ideas. Small minds focus on people.
#44
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@ethang5
Um... that isn't relating to Dr, Franklin's assertion. Regardless if the courts try this, Dr. Franklin has made an assertion and therefore necessarily adopts the burden of proof.
#45
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Dr.Franklin
@Theweakeredge
It is directly related to Doc's opinion. Doc expressed an opinion which I'm sure he expects to be validated by the courts.

The facts that
servers have been confiscated
Switch Votes have been correctly reassigned to Trump
Governor have been reprimanded by the courts
Whole states have started recounts, and 
Eyewitnesses have filed sworn affidavits in courts

Shows Doc is reasonable in his opinion.
#46
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@ethang5
I could care less if it was the President's opinion, huh fancy that, the fact is they both made a claim and have to back it up. And I would rebuke all those claims, I really would, but the people before me have done it so much better than I have. Just go read this forum.
#47
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
That's about the size, where you put your eyes, that's about the size of it.

- Old Sesame Street song.
#48
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@ethang5
Ohkaaaaay.... I'm sorry I have no idea what you're talking about.
#49
Death23
Death23's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 618
3
4
7
Death23's avatar
Death23
3
4
7
-->
@Theweakeredge
The right has seemed non-factual ever since racism became socially unacceptable, but once you understand that they're really speaking in code where ABC means XYZ then things start to make sense. They're accustomed to dog whistles, beating around the bush with lies and what have you. They'll talk about states rights, the harm principle, trickle down economics, individualism, super predators, welfare queens, and whatever but what it's really about is implementing policies that are bad for blacks. They can't just come out and say what they're really thinking so they're all code talkers. You have to learn the code to understand them. Now that you see that they're speaking in code, then you see the code and when it looks like they're lying, well they're not really lying because they don't mean what they said. You have to look at the underlying meaning. Like, when Dr. Franklin says it was a stolen election, what he really means is that he's butthurt about losing and is trying to cover up the pain with some bullshit. Then he hasn't lied to you at all. He just needs someone to help him feel better.
#50
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Death23
Makes sense, but I still like the principal of being intellectually honest myself, even if my opponents might not be.
#51
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@3RU7AL
This is a perfect example.

The entire point of that story is to highlight exactly why it's so important to evaluate EACH INDIVIDUAL CLAIM ON ITS OWN MERIT.

If you remember the parable, the villagers were eaten by the wolf at the end because they ignored valid warnings.
Well stated.

--> @oromagi
the counterargument is not "3RU7AL is a liar and his argument therefore disproved"  
Let's take a look at your actual statement from [POST#7]

the counterargument is "3RU7AL's claim lacks any credible evidence in support"
Oh, really?

Is that what you meant when you said,

"I don't think its an ad hom to point out that Dr Ayyadurai is a famous conspiracy theorists whose false reports have previously led to major retractions of claims from the Washington Post and the Smithsonian Institute (Ayyadurai absurdly claims to have invented email while attending high school in 1979,  8 years after the first documented emails were transmitted) Ayyaduria went to MIT but that doesn't make his analysis an "MIT analysis" MIT does publish a well respected voter analysis 6-8 months after the vote.  Hell, Michigan won't even publish an official vote count until Nov 23rd.  Do we really think MIT is analyzing data that hasn't been published yet?"
Hmmm, I can't find the part where you say anything at all about the claim itself.
Well stated again. There's a lot of attacking the source, not the information. Discrediting the source does not discredit the information. There's also a bit of appeals to incredulity being imputed in these responses here, i.e. "Do we really think MIT is analyzing data that hasn't been published yet?" That which we "really think" is irrelevant. Dr. Shiva and a small team of election investigators conducted an an analysis of all voting data in the State's four largest counties. The information of this analysis is either verifiable or not. It is either correct or it is not. Mentions of "conspiracy theorists" and previous reports do nothing more than distract from the aforementioned.
#52
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,624
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
Any data presented with the aim to discredit the PERSON (while ignoring the substance of their specific CLAIM) is, quite technically, the very definition of an AD HOMINEM ATTACK.

A1+

#53
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Athias
Well stated again. There's a lot of attacking the source, not the information. Discrediting the source does not discredit the information. There's also a bit of appeals to incredulity being imputed in these responses here, i.e. "Do we really think MIT is analyzing data that hasn't been published yet?" That which we "really think" is irrelevant. Dr. Shiva and a small team of election investigators conducted an an analysis of all voting data in the State's four largest counties. The information of this analysis is either verifiable or not. It is either correct or it is not. Mentions of "conspiracy theorists" and previous reports do nothing more than distract from the aforementioned.
So be sure to address post #10 and post #14 where Dusty & I explained why Dr Ayyadurai's claims were bullshit
#54
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@oromagi
So be sure to address post #10 and post #14 where Dusty & I explained why Dr Ayyadurai's claims were bullshit
Why? What does that have to do with your ad hominem?

I did see your quote, and dustyryder's summary of Stand-up Maths video. Those in themselves are sufficient rebuttals to Dr. Ayyadurai's claim. That's all that's necessary. Yet you still sought to discredit Dr. Shiva's character and relate it to the submission of his claim before and after your reference. Why?
#55
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Athias
Why? What does that have to do with your ad hominem?
Because then you would be guilty of attacking the source and not addressing the information


#56
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@oromagi
Because then you would be guilty of attacking the source and not addressing the information
I've no particular stake in the veracity of Dr. Shiva's claim nor am I concerned about your stake. And I'm not "attacking you." Read my statement. It strictly focuses on the information and the arguments. Contradicting the arguments is not akin to attacking the source. (And that's sort of the point.) You're conflating source with the argument. Furthermore, notice that I quoted two of 3RU7AL's statement where he responds to your extending the ad hominem. I typically quote that to which I'm directly referring. I was not referring to the entirety of your participation on this thread. That would've been my following comment.
#57
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ethang5
Big minds focus on Ideas. Small minds focus on people.

I agree. Gossip should be discouraged on this site.
#58
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
ever since racism became socially unacceptable...

Ah to live in a world where media isn't constantly reminding you of the importance of skin color... to dream a dream.
#59
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Ah to live in a world where media isn't constantly reminding you of the importance of skin color... to dream a dream.
yeah, things are so much simpler when racism is ever present, but just not talked about. It lets racist people off the hook. I would imagine that would be very attractive to republicans. 

#60
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Greyparrot
I wouldn't say the fight against racism is about how important a skin color, and I honestly don't watch the news, I research. Honestly, I agree that sometimes the news sensationalizes content that doesn't need it, but I couldn't really address anything the news has said about BLM considering I haven't watched the news in like a year.