Do you think you Don't overlook anything?

 I overlook plenty.  What I do not do is assume what I Observe is fact.


So, I would appreciate it if you would knock it off, I am aware of your opinion.

 You choose to post here, as such you open your posts up to other members to comment on.  We know you position on abortion, would it make sense for a member to tell you to "knock it off" when you comment on an pro-abortion post because they are "aware of your opinion"?  Is that how a discussion forum should work?



"I have no idea what you are suggesting I do differently. I don't have a crew of people to read things and bring me up to speed."

 I've never suggested you do anything.  I offer my opinion on the posts you choose to provide here.  I know you do not have a crew of researchers, which is why I find it interesting you argue with somebody who does, and reads Your information for you, then tells you what's really in there.  Don't you realize when you argue information is wrong it's almost always Your information?  

 Look at the Graphene post.  We went through all 600+ documents and on this forum people just argue about that, move the goalposts, or literally refuse to look at the post so they can say they "aren't sure" what it says.  That's intentional, so they don't have to acknowledge or Observe information they do not want to be true.  Everywhere else people just say thanks for looking at all the data and showing that that specific claim, and only that claim, was a lie.  To those people Truth is more important than being right, or having evidence to support their opinion at any cost.


 
"You seem unable to develop an opinion until there is no actual opinion, you seem to need ALL the information so it's not an opinion, it's a foregone conclusion."

 I don't hunt for evidence to support my opinion.  With the internet any opinion can be supported because anyone can put anything on the internet as "fact".   I create an opinion based off evidence, and the more evidence there is, the more accurate of an opinion one can make.  


"What I SEE, I see, and I use it accordingly.
You don't have to like it. You can say it's NOT a valid approach."

 This approach leads to things like You claiming information is "lies" then giving that exact same, word for word, information back as truth.  You only care where the source comes from, and what they tell you it says, not what it actually says.  You can't find "truth" that way - it's impossible.


IOW, leave me the fukk alone about my observations of reality.

 How about you just leave people alone about their opinions and information they find on Biden, Hillary, Russiagate, Climate Change or Abortion.  If you think their Observations are false, don't say anything.  Does that sound like a good way to have a discussion forum?

It's Really funny to see someone act like what I call Observed Reality is not A valid approach to decision making.
Wouldn't the label
EXPERIENCE also apply? Looking at what we've Seen, what we watched happen, if Someone chooses to Ignore those things, what kinda moron would they be?

It's Really funny to see someone act like what I call Observed Reality is not A valid approach to decision making.
Wouldn't the label
EXPERIENCE also apply? Looking at what we've Seen, what we watched happen, if Someone chooses to Ignore those things, what kinda moron would they be?


 I already agreed EXPERIENCE is a more valid argument as one typically does not Observe events they Experience.  If you get into a motorcycle wreck, it's very difficult to not Observe that event.  

 But if someone offers information stating motorcycle wrecks are at an all-time high, one can choose to not Observe that data, provide contradictory information they found on the internet (because literally anything can be made up and posted online) that they refuse to read/Observe for themselves, and also claim they do not Observe more motorcycle wrecks when they are out driving around, so obviously the increase in wrecks is false.  

 The logic being they haven't seen more motorcycle wrecks, and they won't look at anything that says different.  They don't have to look because Observed reality, the tiny amount of life on the planet they "see" is enough to know any other information provided on the planet from any source is going to be wrong.

 That's a weak argument.  What one human Observes is less accurate than lets say motorcycle insurance claims, hospital records, coroner reports, DoT road cleanup documents and tow records.  Collective information cross-referenced across a spectrum will always be more accurate than one guy's Observations.

 They might charge Baldwin again:

https://www.avclub.com/rust-charges-against-alec-baldwin-could-be-refiled-185...

 "the trigger had to be pulled or depressed sufficiently to release the fully cocked or retracted hammer"

 The yesterday that it was posted on.

Serowbot wrote on 08/16/23 at 11:28:30:

Some do some don't.
  But anybody,
That is ANYBODY
that knows the slightest thing about a firearm knows that a 'transfer bar' is NOT the ultimate 'safety' device.

The ULTIMATE 'safety device' is the person holding/using the gun.

Which Baldwin was NOT !!!!!!

And again,
the last person to hold/point/shoot,
IS the person responsible.

Yet it is the way of the UL, FDS, WOKE Socialists,
that responsibility is in SOMEONE ELSE'S HANDS.

Serowbot wrote on 08/16/23 at 14:05:17:

And for those that do not understand;

The ULTIMATE 'safety device' is the person holding/using the gun.
  (NOT a transfer bar)

Again:
The last person to hold/point/shoot,
IS the person responsible.
    (NOT a transfer bar)

It is the way of the UL, FDS, WOKE, Socialists,
that responsibility is in SOMEONE ELSE'S HANDS.
      (NOT a transfer bar)

I have worked on movie sets and guns will be pointed and triggers will be pulled.  It's the nature of film making.
You can't watch a thriller , western, or action film where you don't see it.

Your "gun safety" rules don't apply.
Just like children with plastic toys or cocked fingers on a playground.
It's a known fact.
Get over it.