Skip to main content

View Diary: Meta: "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Proof", with Poll (93 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Or, with a more relevant example (5+ / 0-)

    If you looked at the Iraq war intelligence on the "ordinary evidence" standard, you saw that every individual piece of evidence fell apart when scrutinized.  Anyone tuning out the public discourse and looking at the evidence would have reached the right conclusion: that any weapons Iraq had were old useless rusty hulks.

    If, however, you assumed that the government wasn't lying to you, and that there were mountains of secret evidence which couldn't be scrutinized, and that conventional wisdom inside and outside of government must be correct... then the assertion that the government was lying about Iraqi WMDs was an extraordinary claim.  And the burden of proof was put on the peace advocates to not merely prove a negative, but to provide extraordinary evidence proving a negative.

    What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

    by happymisanthropy on Sat May 11, 2013 at 11:12:45 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site