Lately there has been a curious rise in the number of people relying on former attorney and poet Seth Abramson as a so-called expert on the Trump-Russia situation.
Some might recall that Seth first rose to fame when he fantastically claimed that Bernie Sanders was ahead in the Democratic Nomination, and when called on it, made up an excuse so feeble that it would make Alex Jones blush:
Unfortunately it seems that when people are being told what they want to hear, memories grow dim very quickly:
Stunningly, the criticisms of the left's Alex Jones are coming not from the right, but rather from the Left. Thus the above quotes are taken from think progress of all places:
https://thinkprogress.org/blue-detec...-a42a94537bdf/
So the next time you are thinking about inflicted a Seth "meta-thread" on this forum, take a minute and think whether the left's infowars is the type of "authority" with which you want to be associated.
Not ever, not once
Some might recall that Seth first rose to fame when he fantastically claimed that Bernie Sanders was ahead in the Democratic Nomination, and when called on it, made up an excuse so feeble that it would make Alex Jones blush:
Quote:
When confronted, Abramson called his writing experimental journalism aimed at creating a metanarrative that would be every bit as powerful and present and perceivable as any other. |
Quote:
All of that, though, was forgotten as Trump entered office and as Abramson began crafting his excruciatingly long Twitter threads, all while picking up media appearances on CNN, CBS, BBC, and elsewhere. It didnt seem to matter that Abramson had negligible expertise on any of the topics at hand there are any thousands of other lawyers, still active members of the bar, who could comment on Muellers investigation or that his history of conspiratorial fallacies nearly match the others. (Abramson has denied that hes a conspiracy theorist.) |
https://thinkprogress.org/blue-detec...-a42a94537bdf/
Quote:
Over the past few months, other outlets have begun picking up the ball and voicing their criticism of Abramson. For Fast Company, Abramson operates [by] making grand generalizations about news already reported, but misconstruing even the easiest-to-understand parts in the name of an ideological goal. For Slate, [Abramsons] schtick is less credulous fabulism than hyperbolic sleight of hand. And for the Washington Post, Abramsons tweets link copiously to sources, but they range in quality from investigative news articles to off-the-wall Facebook posts and tweets from Tom Arnold. The New Republic and Atlantic have both dismissed the professor as a conspiracy theorist. GQ, Deadspin. The Outline, and Vice have also publicly called out Abramsons conspiracy-mongering. |
Not ever, not once
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/2GfMp2l
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire