Are you a Twain fan, brother? I have his complete works around here somewhere that I've been meaning to get to.

@LovinLarge I like his wry insights, but he's not my favorite author in terms of comedy. I liked Louis CK, but then he turned out to be over-the-line crazy. I wonder if Twain secretly had a twist like that ? Heheheh.

@TO_BY I wanted to let you know how much I appreciate all your support. It has not gone unnoticed.

I hesitate to compliment anyone here now because yesterday I was accused if being insincere. I am a lot of things but insincere isn't one of them. I have that same impression of you.

Your approach tells me that you are after the truth and for me at the end of the day that is the point of my journey. I hope I understood you accurately. Thank you.

I don't know why the fellow who commented before you changed the subject to opinions because my post doesn't address opinions.

But thanks for hearing me loud and clear about unsubstantiated facts. The reason I mention it is because I'm disappointed that it happens so much here and how combatant people become when asked for supporting evidence. How else distinguish fact from fiction?

"Factual assertions" are not opinions.

@LovinLarge memes or other pop media are not factual assertions, and should be taken with a grain of salt. They are opinions.

@AgeofReason Not necessarily. For instance, often memes include written, undated, unsubstantiated quotations alleged to be from a particular person, which is a factual assertion.

Feel free to try to disprove my post, but not by substituting alternate subject matter.

@LovinLarge I guess we see this differently. Anything unsubstantiated is not a factual assertion. Almost the whole of the internet is unsubstantiated, and limiting it to only those who cite references will substantially reduce content, as well as infringe on free speech. Dogma is also opinion, although the religious doesn’t see it that way. I understand you don’t like false content. Neither do I, but it’s been happening since the beginning of time—religion.

@AgeofReason I think it's irresponsible to say that something is true without proving it, and it brings the credibility of that person into question. But more specifically, to do so on a website for non-religious people is quite ironic.

The conservatives here are notorious for it. Last week I fought with them for days over saying BLM did this and that without a single shred of evidence. They posted videos that in no way identified BLM. I have zero respect for anyone who does this type of thing on any subject and I am damn well going to say so.

Last night, one of the cons posted part of an article and attributed certain conclusions to it. I asked to see the whole article and the data. Instead of substantiating his claim, he blocked me. While I'm always happy to be blocked by someone like that because I certainly wouldn't interact with them in real time, other cons were going along with his charade. In the final analysis, such claims are not credible and such people are not respectable.

@LovinLarge I completely understand that. It is most disreputable to attempt to sway others with “fake news”. The fact that they blocked you reinforces they couldn’t back up their claims.

@AgeofReason Thank you. I think I just needed to have that issue flushed out before I could turn my mind to the issue of opinion.

Remember that old saying that everyone's entitled to an opinion? And then the offshoot of that everyone's opinion is equally valid. I like that people are opinionated and I learn from other peoples' opinions, but eventually I figured out that opinions are only as valid as the facts upon which they are based. Do you think that's a fair conclusion to draw?

@LovinLarge absolutely. Some opinions aren’t worth much, at all. Those are usually the ones who sing theirs the loudest! I still believe in everyone’s right to be a fool or appear foolish, no matter how wrong-headed they may be. That’s why they cannot stand up to scrutiny.