Labours glorious felching victory

[CommanderJameson]

TF2: I am confused by the title of your OP. "Felching" is, as you're undoubtedly aware, the technical term for the act performed when a gentleman retrieves his seed from the posterior of another gentleman (or, perhaps, a particularly adventurous lady), whence he has deposited it, without using his hands.

Would you care to de-confuse me by explaining what the term is doing in your title?

[SpeedMattersNot]

CommanderJameson said:

TF2: I am confused by the title of your OP. "Felching" is, as you're undoubtedly aware, the technical term for the act performed when a gentleman retrieves his seed from the posterior of another gentleman (or, perhaps, a particularly adventurous lady), whence he has deposited it, without using his hands.

Would you care to de-confuse me by explaining what the term is doing in your title?

He's just confirming he's not biased in his political views in the slightest. That's all...

:|

[thinfourth2]

CommanderJameson said:

TF2: I am confused by the title of your OP. "Felching" is, as you're undoubtedly aware, the technical term for the act performed when a gentleman retrieves his seed from the posterior of another gentleman (or, perhaps, a particularly adventurous lady), whence he has deposited it, without using his hands.

Would you care to de-confuse me by explaining what the term is doing in your title?

You are looking for a level of political commentary and insight that isn't there. This is why you see bias everywhere.

The simple answer is Feltham sounds a bit like felching.

Its like looking for political commentary in the adventures of finbar saunders it just isn't there and if you find any then you are deeply wrong

[turbobloke]

thinfourth2 said:

CommanderJameson said:

TF2: I am confused by the title of your OP. "Felching" is, as you're undoubtedly aware, the technical term for the act performed when a gentleman retrieves his seed from the posterior of another gentleman (or, perhaps, a particularly adventurous lady), whence he has deposited it, without using his hands.

Would you care to de-confuse me by explaining what the term is doing in your title?

You are looking for a level of political commentary and insight that isn't there. This is why you see bias everywhere.

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

[Countdown]

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

Everybody is biased, depending on their upbringing, education, and experiences.

Most people think that anybody who doesn't agree with them is biased, weheras their own conclusions are reached after a detailed impartial forensic analysis of the available evidence.

[Globs]

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

Everybody is biased, depending on their upbringing, education, and experiences.

Most people think that anybody who doesn't agree with them is biased, weheras their own conclusions are reached after a detailed impartial forensic analysis of the available evidence.

No, they just need to present both sides of any argument, with time allotted based on opinion poll or election percentages.
It's simple, scientific and easy to do.
If they did this with AGW, the EU and our government it would be fine.

[thinfourth2]

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

If someone is seeing political bias in a bad finbar saunders inspired thread title then i think we know where the bias is

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

Everybody is biased, depending on their upbringing, education, and experiences.

You seem to be confusing the background and personal position of individuals with their ability to make a rational judgement. Nobody is inevitably biased in their evaluation of evidence for or against a proposition, but some are.

The claim of bias against the BBC isn't a matter of opinion but a matter of record.

Moreover the point you make isn't material to the issue of whether the BBC is biased or not.

[turbobloke]

thinfourth2 said:

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

If someone is seeing political bias in a bad finbar saunders inspired thread title then i think we know where the bias is

If generalisation, hyperbole and passing opinion as fact relate to bias, why not take a look in the mirror?

[CommanderJameson]

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

Quite so. When I want left-wing bias, I read The Grauniad; when I want right-wing bias, I read PistonHeads.

On the bright side, though, there are now some people on PH who, up until my post, didn't know what felching is, and now they do.

I'm sure their gratitude is without limit.

[turbobloke]

CommanderJameson said:

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

Quite so. When I want left-wing bias, I read The Grauniad; when I want right-wing bias, I read PistonHeads.

On the bright side, though, there are now some people on PH who, up until my post, didn't know what felching is, and now they do.

I'm sure their gratitude is without limit.

Quite so! You were material in pointing out an obvious straw man argument.

[thinfourth2]

CommanderJameson said:

Quite so. When I want left-wing bias, I read The Grauniad; when I want right-wing bias, I read PistonHeads.

On the bright side, though, there are now some people on PH who, up until my post, didn't know what felching is, and now they do.

I'm sure their gratitude is without limit.

Teamwork

[Countdown]

turbobloke said:

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

Everybody is biased, depending on their upbringing, education, and experiences.

You seem to be confusing the background and personal position of individuals with their ability to make a rational judgement.

There's no "confusion" about it. A person's judgement will generally be influenced by their background, history, education etc.

It would take something radical to change those preconceptions because it means accepting that everything you believed in, up until that point, was flawed.

turbobloke said:

Nobody is inevitably biased in their evaluation of evidence for or against a proposition, but some are.

Unless its an issue which completely new to the person, or one which they have never previously taken a position on then they will have a prejudice.

[Randy Winkman]

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

Everybody is biased, depending on their upbringing, education, and experiences.

You seem to be confusing the background and personal position of individuals with their ability to make a rational judgement.

There's no "confusion" about it. A person's judgement will generally be influenced by their background, history, education etc.

It would take something radical to change those preconceptions because it means accepting that everything you believed in, up until that point, was flawed.

turbobloke said:

Nobody is inevitably biased in their evaluation of evidence for or against a proposition, but some are.

Unless its an issue which completely new to the person, or one which they have never previously taken a position on then they will have a prejudice.

Nice post. And it's what scientific study has shown to be the case.

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

Most independent minded rational people, and there are enough on PH, see bias where it exists. Hyperbole such as 'everywhere' doesn't work btw.

Everybody is biased, depending on their upbringing, education, and experiences.

You seem to be confusing the background and personal position of individuals with their ability to make a rational judgement.

There's no "confusion" about it. A person's judgement will generally be influenced by their background, history, education etc.

It would take something radical to change those preconceptions because it means accepting that everything you believed in, up until that point, was flawed.

That has neatly pointed out the flaw in such arguments with regard to the debate on PH. It's not a matter of faith or belief, but rational analysis.

Those fond of unthinking tribalistic behaviour tend not to be of the PH mentality. This site is typically frequented by people who make up their own minds regardless of backgrounds.

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

Nobody is inevitably biased in their evaluation of evidence for or against a proposition, but some are.

Unless its an issue which completely new to the person, or one which they have never previously taken a position on then they will have a prejudice.

Assuming prejudice over all things in all people as above is wrong as it's predicated on the false premise that prior analysis is equivalent to bias, when it's quite the opposite.

[turbobloke]

Randy Winkman said:

Nice post. And it's what scientific study has shown to be the case.

That's extremely doubtful as human behaviour is often irrational, random, unthinking and most certainly unscientific.

The 'science' element of social science is a borrowed item, and the loan has been overdue for some time.

[Countdown]

turbobloke said:

Those fond of unthinking tribalistic behaviour tend not to be of the PH mentality.

The nature of PH is extremely tribalistic. We all share the same interest in cars, one which isn't necessarily shared by the wider public. There's a shedload of views posted on here which fortunately do not reflect the views of the population at large.

turbobloke said:

This site is typically frequented by people who make up their own minds regardless of backgrounds.

Everybody makes up their own minds. This isn't something unique to members of PH. Members of PH aren't imbued with any special skills which makes them more intelligent or rational than the average MOP

turbobloke said:

Assuming prejudice over all things in all people as above is wrong as it's predicated on the false premise that prior analysis is equivalent to bias, when it's quite the opposite.

No it isn't. Prior analysis IS equivalent to bias. If you have already analysed something and reached a conclusion you are unlikely to ignore the conclusion the next time you evaluate something similar. And if your original conclusion was flawed then your second evaluation will start with a false bias. Unless you're assuming that every evaluation starts with a clean sheet of paper.

Edited by Countdown on Sunday 18th December 13:01

[Countdown]

turbobloke said:

That's extremely doubtful as human behaviour is often irrational, random, unthinking and most certainly unscientific.

Its occasionally irrational, random etc. In most cases, given sufficient analysis, its quite predictable. Try posting some evidence about climate change or the effects of speed cameras on accident rates and see what the responses are

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

That's extremely doubtful as human behaviour is often irrational, random, unthinking and most certainly unscientific.

Its occasionally irrational, random etc. In most cases, given sufficient analysis, its quite predictable. Try posting some evidence about climate change or the effects of speed cameras on accident rates and see what the responses are

Sure, there's a mix of the rational (vehicle speed is a small % as a causal factor in accidents) and the emotional (speed kills), together with unthinking belief (the evidence-free-zone of manmadeup warming) being attractive to some as a belief system, a social movement not a scientific one.

However it looks to me as though you're arguing for human behaviour as being predictably biased on occasions, rather than being largely rational or 'scientific'. There are Labour heartlands that keep voting Labour in spite of the devastation it causes to the economy - and as a result to everybody in the country - including those heartlands...almost all measures of poverty up, public sector efficiency and value for money down, country almost bankrupt at the end of it, etc. That's predictable but it's not rational or in any way scientific, such an approach would look at the evidence rather than repeat entrenched tribal or familial behaviours. This is what happened in the by-election and it'll happen again.

In the case of PH and bias, the concern I see is with the existence of bias not the direction of it. If you think I might not object if the BBC were biased in certain alternative directions you'd be wrong, also PH is one place where backgrounds count for little in every sense. It's a good place to be for many because all opinions are allowed airtime (and are usually appreciated regardless of the perspective if well put e.g. without insults) unlike with the BBC or in party politics where bias is totally obvious.

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

The nature of PH is extremely tribalistic.

This may be down to interpretation. Views about cars - as you point out - or politics or anything else may be largely in common, but are not held because our parents or large sections of the community sway opinion. The views and positions are self-determined.

For tribalistic, read shared, or similar.

Countdown said:

Everybody makes up their own minds. This isn't something unique to members of PH. Members of PH aren't imbued with any special skills which makes them more intelligent or rational than the average MOP

Absolutely disagree, though as time goes by you will be more and more correct as the size of PH grows. Barclays Premier et al would not waste marketing budget on this site if it was mostly populated by your average sheeple.

Countdown said:

No it isn't.

Panto time! Oh yes it is.

Countdown said:

Prior analysis IS equivalent to bias.

Oh no it isn't.

Countdown said:

If you have already analysed something and reached a conclusion you are unlikely to ignore the conclusion the next time you evaluate something similar.

Only if you have become biased in the intervening period, and why would anybody do that

"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do sir?"

If your original conclusion is correct and all you see put up against it is tangential, diversionary, flimflam, spin, opinion dressed as fact (etc) you will keep to your original conclusion and rightly so. If credible evidence appears that contradicts a previously held viewpoint, that's different. See the Keynes quote above.