(11-24-2019 11:43 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  For those following along at home:

An opinion piece by Casey Michel is posted that suggest that Joe Biden's efforts to oust Shokin increased the potential for scrutiny of his son's dealings with Bursima, countering the conservative narrative that Joe Biden was acting to protect or support his son.

Instead of just saying they don't buy the article, folks suggest that liberal posters only believe this oped because Michel is on their side. Lad points out that Michel is highly credentialed when it comes to corruption in post-soviet states, OO and Tanq spend a couple days calling Lad a dummy for believing that degrees or experience in a topic should confer weight to this person's opinion.

It finally gets pointed out that OO and Tanq's line of attack on Lad suggests that no one can be an expert on anything. Michel is obviously an expert in this field. If you reject his opinion, that's your prerogative.

Tanq:

I think you just defamed me with an untruth.

But just in case my memory is faulty, you may feel free to give me the quote of me calling Lad a dummy.

(11-22-2019 06:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I have been told I am intentionally obtuse. Probably so.

I watch a lot of true crime on TV - 20/20, Dateline, etc.

So often the "expert" testimony in court is a case of dueling experts, a veritable "he said, he said".

Expert #1 - Ph. D, years of experience testifying, many posts held, many papers published. He says "It happened THIS way".

Expert #2 - Ph.D., years of experience testifying, many posts held, many papers published. He says "No, it happened THAT way".

Which one do you take as God's truth? On what basis? They both are Ph.Ds.

That was my point. I don't care what this guy says, pro or con. I won't buy just because he has a Ph. D. I don't put a lot of faith into Ph.Ds, of any kind.
I guess Lad and Fountains do.

Just saw a case a couple of days ago where a Ph.D expert witness testified that bite marks on a victim provided an ID based on bite marks, alleging the bite marks were as definitive as fingerprints in identifying and individual. The accused was convicted and sent to death row on the basis of the expert testimony. Eleven years later, he was cleared on the basis of DNA evidence. Another man, tagged by the DNA, confessed.

So, one PH. D. expert with egg on his face.

And Fountains, I answered your question.

Re: Paul Krugman. He has a Nobel I believe. He used to be a panelist on CNN, and I often watched him. Very left biased. I cannot remember a single projection of his that came to be. To me, he is like a baseball player who hit a grand slam in his first at bat, never did much after that.

(11-24-2019 01:19 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  

(11-22-2019 06:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I have been told I am intentionally obtuse. Probably so.

Yep. That usually happens when I ask people to back up their words or what they attribute to me.

I guess it is happening again. Rather than show that I called lad a dummy, you choose t call me obtuse. Bait and switch.

(11-24-2019 01:12 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 12:57 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 12:50 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 11:52 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I have a JD, a doctorate level degree in law. Accordingly, I should be considered an expert, or have expertise, in tax implications of the ownership of foreign-based entities that have interests in gambling in Indian reservations. A simple yes or no should suffice, Fountain.

If you have experience practicing law in that area, or are on a council that discusses those very topics, yes.

Casey Michel has spent what appears to be his entire post-undergrad career visiting, reporting on, and writing academically about kleptocracy and corruption in post-soviet states. He is on the advisory council for the Hudson Institute's Kleptocracy Initiative.

That wasnt the question, was it?

Nor is the topic you follow up with the topic that I was talking about, is it?

Good grief. It is a simple as fk question, yet you cannot answer it. Amazing.

Dance that cha cha cha there.

Your question draws a false equivalence.

To Lads assertion that the sin qua non of expertise in a specific subject is advanced degree in the general area it most certainly is not.

A simple yes or no will suffice. What about that very simple question is problematic for you? It actually is a very simple question that you are thrashing about with here.

Where did he go?

(11-24-2019 01:03 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  oh my god. Michel's master's thesis literally mentions John Solomon as a shill for whitewashing Russian and post-soviet kleptocracies.

OMG, it's in a master's thesis? That makes it unassailable truth.

(11-24-2019 12:43 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  I've been asking for like 3 days, what should Mr. Michel have done differently to prove himself an expert?

Get 20 or 30 years of experience that he doesn't have.

Quote:If you want to reject his opinion on the grounds that it comes from a source you consider biased, that's fine.
His degrees and institutional affiliations put this topic squarely in his wheelhouse. You've expended all this energy to say over and over degrees do not necessarily confer expertise. Is there reason to believe they do not confer expertise in this case?

Yes, because degrees don't confer expertise.

(11-24-2019 12:50 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  Casey Michel has spent what appears to be his entire post-undergrad career visiting, reporting on, and writing academically about kleptocracy and corruption in post-soviet states. He is on the advisory council for the Hudson Institute's Kleptocracy Initiative.

Yeah, what appears to be all 9 years of that experience. He's a young pup, and apparently a highly biased young pup. Put him up against someone with 20-30 years of experience actually doing things instead of writing about them, and I know very easily which one I would consider the true expert.

(11-24-2019 01:03 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  oh my god. Michel's master's thesis literally mentions John Solomon as a shill for whitewashing Russian and post-soviet kleptocracies.

Who is out here working with Guiliani to push conspiracies about Ukraine that benefit Russia and post-soviet kleptocracies that are still under Russia's sphere of influence?

John Solomon

That’s hilarious given Michel’s detractor here is the same useful idiot linking Solomon.

(11-24-2019 02:43 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 01:03 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  oh my god. Michel's master's thesis literally mentions John Solomon as a shill for whitewashing Russian and post-soviet kleptocracies.

Who is out here working with Guiliani to push conspiracies about Ukraine that benefit Russia and post-soviet kleptocracies that are still under Russia's sphere of influence?

John Solomon

That’s hilarious given Michel’s detractor here is the same useful idiot linking Solomon.

Linking Solomon opinion pieces and then trying to act high and might about not posting opinion pieces...

(11-24-2019 02:49 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 02:43 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 01:03 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  oh my god. Michel's master's thesis literally mentions John Solomon as a shill for whitewashing Russian and post-soviet kleptocracies.

Who is out here working with Guiliani to push conspiracies about Ukraine that benefit Russia and post-soviet kleptocracies that are still under Russia's sphere of influence?

John Solomon

That’s hilarious given Michel’s detractor here is the same useful idiot linking Solomon.

Linking Solomon opinion pieces and then trying to act high and might about not posting opinion pieces...

I definitely try not to link opinion pieces without noting them as such. That is 'high and mighty'? Glad to note that trying not to post opinion pieces is such a negative in your book. What other trigger issues do you have. Though.

Still waiting for your yes or no answer. As opposed the that pile of **** blather you put forth.

So the funny thing is the item I pointed out earlier.

Dont like Solomon's message; attack Solomon.

Dont like Project Veritas message; attack O'Keefe.

Someone has the temerity to point out that someone else didnt bother to read base sources from a SPCL post; call them ignorant and run away.

Someone questions the assertion that a masters degree should be revered as the end all of expertise; call them pompous and hubristic.

Someone says they try not to post opinions as a general rule; call them high and mighty.

At the same time the supposed demigod mentions the author of an opinion piece posted in a negative manner -- the result is a almost akin to group sex amongst them.

Glad your noted demigod doesnt agree with Solomon. Doesnt make him (or you for that matter) right. Funny that.

That little bit of referential insight is amazingly missing in your superlative analysis. Kind of makes my point for me in this post by definition.

(11-24-2019 11:43 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  For those following along at home:

An opinion piece by Casey Michel is posted that suggest that Joe Biden's efforts to oust Shokin increased the potential for scrutiny of his son's dealings with Bursima, countering the conservative narrative that Joe Biden was acting to protect or support his son.

Instead of just saying they don't buy the article, folks suggest that liberal posters only believe this oped because Michel is on their side. Lad points out that Michel is highly credentialed when it comes to corruption in post-soviet states, OO and Tanq spend a couple days calling Lad a dummy for believing that degrees or experience in a topic should confer weight to this person's opinion.

It finally gets pointed out that OO and Tanq's line of attack on Lad suggests that no one can be an expert on anything. Michel is obviously an expert in this field. If you reject his opinion, that's your prerogative.

Tanq:

I am just sitting here calmly and serenely posting my opinions. From here it looks like Fountains, AtEase, and Lad having the temper fits.

(11-24-2019 05:39 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

Does AR get his info from anywhere besides Twitter? And who is Carol anyway? Is she an expert? Does she have any degrees?

As much as AE likes Twitter, you would think he would be a Trumpophile.

(11-24-2019 05:58 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Does AE get his info from anywhere besides Twitter? And who is Carol anyway? Is she an expert? Does she have any degrees?
As much as AE likes Twitter, you would think he would be a Trumpophile.

Carol is Bryn Mawr graduate and a WaPo writer and MSNBC contributor. That pretty much fixes her location on the bias scale.

(11-24-2019 06:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 05:58 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Does AE get his info from anywhere besides Twitter? And who is Carol anyway? Is she an expert? Does she have any degrees?
As much as AE likes Twitter, you would think he would be a Trumpophile.

Carol is a WaPo writer and MSNBC contributor. That pretty much fixes her location on the bias scale.

Oh, so he is quoting one of the priestesses of his religion?

How many Ph.D.s does she have and where are they from?

(11-24-2019 06:06 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 06:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 05:58 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Does AE get his info from anywhere besides Twitter? And who is Carol anyway? Is she an expert? Does she have any degrees?
As much as AE likes Twitter, you would think he would be a Trumpophile.

Carol is a WaPo writer and MSNBC contributor. That pretty much fixes her location on the bias scale.

Oh, so he is quoting on of the priestesses of his religion?

Kinda looks that way.

(11-24-2019 06:07 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 06:06 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 06:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 05:58 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Does AE get his info from anywhere besides Twitter? And who is Carol anyway? Is she an expert? Does she have any degrees?
As much as AE likes Twitter, you would think he would be a Trumpophile.

Carol is a WaPo writer and MSNBC contributor. That pretty much fixes her location on the bias scale.

Oh, so he is quoting on of the priestesses of his religion?

Kinda looks that way.

Reminds me of the Bible thumpers who quote the Bible to prove some point.

It say right here in Micah...

(11-24-2019 06:07 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 06:06 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 06:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-24-2019 05:58 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Does AE get his info from anywhere besides Twitter? And who is Carol anyway? Is she an expert? Does she have any degrees?
As much as AE likes Twitter, you would think he would be a Trumpophile.

Carol is a WaPo writer and MSNBC contributor. That pretty much fixes her location on the bias scale.

Oh, so he is quoting on of the priestesses of his religion?

Kinda looks that way.

Reminds me of the Bible thumpers who quote the Bible to prove some point.

It say right here in Micah...a prophet shall speak to you, twittering like a bird...