Among Friends

[Midmod]

@Foxxee
It actually never occurred to me to think you were 🙂
I didn't think you espoused the viewpoints at that site. I was curious about the obtuseness of it actually. Then I went to that site and got creeped out by it.
I knew you had taken it at face value. I wasn't directing my comment at you; just how I saw it in general.
Actually this thread is fascinating in the respect that everyone sees things from so many different perspectives.
@Foxxee I would never scold you or attempt to belittle you for posting anything. And I didn't assume any such thing as what your stance on current events. I don't come here to bait or any such thing and I'm VERY sorry my comments were taken that way.
Thank you for pointing out to me that I need to be more careful in my wording.
I hope I am forgiven?

[Foxxee]

---

@Midmod wrote:
@Foxxee
It actually never occurred to me to think you were 🙂
I didn't think you espoused the viewpoints at that site. I was curious about the obtuseness of it actually. Then I went to that site and got creeped out by it.
I knew you had taken it at face value. I wasn't directing my comment at you; just how I saw it in general.
Actually this thread is fascinating in the respect that everyone sees things from so many different perspectives.
@FoxxeeI would never scold you or attempt to belittle you for posting anything. And I didn't assume any such thing as what your stance on current events. I don't come here to bait or any such thing and I'm VERY sorry my comments were taken that way.
Thank you for pointing out to me that I need to be more careful in my wording.
I hope I am forgiven?

---

@Midmod 

Oh my yes.  Nothing to forgive. Lol.  We do interpret things differently.  You expressed an opinion and want that. 

It creeped ME out to find out it had been posted with an anti-police movement.  I don't see the connection to the photo statement and the police.  

I wanted to make sure everyone knew where I was coming and it wasn't concerning the police.  

Thanks for explaining to me. 

[wifey2qt]

@Foxxee  -the word "research" is thrown about and used pretty loosely is all I am saying..... at some point common sense has to play in  , which is where we draw a line based on reasonability. Good sources are those that have proven themselves to be reliable over time. Not just a pop up overnight .....You can dig til you find something that satisfies your narrative or live in a state of paranoia 

[Greeneyedlady21]

Is Among Friends the political forum now?

[hckynutjohn]

---

@Greeneyedlady21 wrote:
Is Among Friends the political forum now?

@Greeneyedlady21 

🔥

hckynut 🇺🇸

---

[Foxxee]

---

@wifey2qt wrote:

@Foxxee  -the word "research" is thrown about and used pretty loosely is all I am saying..... at some point common sense has to play in  , which is where we draw a line based on reasonability. Good sources are those that have proven themselves to be reliable over time. Not just a pop up overnight .....You can dig til you find something that satisfies your narrative or live in a state of paranoia 

---

@wifey2qt 

What you say is true.

Using words loosely appears to be an American pastime.  Is it poor education?  Lack of critical thinking, logic, common sense, analysis, good judgement?  Schools have been teaching propaganda, not how to think. 

[Love to Run]

When people tell me "I do my own research" and then cite Youtube and media websites I know exactly who I'm dealing with. True research is conducted under strict controls and published in peer-reviewed journals, not media outlets.

[Foxxee]

---

@Love to Run wrote:

When people tell me "I do my own research" and then cite Youtube and media websites I know exactly who I'm dealing with. True research is conducted under strict controls and published in peer-reviewed journals, not media outlets.

---

@Love to Run 

Yes, that's one definition.  Others from Webster:

: the collecting of information about a particular subject.

: careful or diligent search.

Surely, if we want to know the truth about something we would do a careful search.  That goes without saying.  Not all sources tell the truth.  

Science research is not always true that is  published in peer-reviewed journals.  Looking at the Medical Community, Lancet, although highly respected is a journal that publishes research articles sometimes presents sketchy research.  AMA journal is another one.  New England Journal is the most reliable and respected that I know of right now of the well-known general medical journals that are not specialized.  Even then, they were publishing sketchy information about Covid.  They did retract it.  

Depending on the subject, that research must be consistently duplicated by others to prove it's true. 

One way to see if something is the truth, look for other sources telling the exact same story.  Be careful, though, there are news outlets that intentionally repeat the same false story, using the same words, because they have an agenda.  

There are media research reporters who do report the truth.  

Take a simple example many can relate to.  Coffee for instance.  How many times did we find out from "researchers" it was harmful, only to be told later by other "researchers" later, it was helpful.  This has been going on for years.  

Why wouldn't you use YouTube as a source for information depending on the subject matter? It doesn't matter where you go, TV, Internet, newspapers, books, movies, even colleges and universities, where we'll find some inaccurate information. There are excellent history videos, one example, on YouTube that can be proven to be true by other sources.

[Love to Run]

---

@Foxxee wrote:

---

@Love to Run wrote:

When people tell me "I do my own research" and then cite Youtube and media websites I know exactly who I'm dealing with. True research is conducted under strict controls and published in peer-reviewed journals, not media outlets.

---

@Love to Run 

Yes, that's one definition.  Others from Webster:

: the collecting of information about a particular subject.

: careful or diligent search.

Surely, if we want to know the truth about something we would do a careful search.  That goes without saying.  Not all sources tell the truth.  

Science research is not always true that is  published in peer-reviewed journals.  Looking at the Medical Community, Lancet, although highly respected is a journal that publishes research articles sometimes presents sketchy research.  AMA journal is another one.  New England Journal is the most reliable and respected that I know of right now of the well-known general medical journals that are not specialized.  Even then, they were publishing sketchy information about Covid.  They did retract it.  

Depending on the subject, that research must be consistently duplicated by others to prove it's true. 

One way to see if something is the truth, look for other sources telling the exact same story.  Be careful, though, there are news outlets that intentionally repeat the same false story, using the same words, because they have an agenda.  

There are media research reporters who do report the truth.  

Take a simple example many can relate to.  Coffee for instance.  How many times did we find out from "researchers" it was harmful, only to be told later by other "researchers" later, it was helpful.  This has been going on for years.  

Why wouldn't you use YouTube as a source for information depending on the subject matter? It doesn't matter where you go, TV, Internet, newspapers, books, movies, even colleges and universities, where we'll find some inaccurate information. There are excellent history videos, one example, on YouTube that can be proven to be true by other sources.

---

@Foxxee And here we go...Science is always changing because it changes with new information. Dogma never changes with new information. Of course there are many variables that must be taken into account when reading scientific research, I always read the abstract--not the dumbed-down version espoused in the media.  There are many reliable, objective sources of information, but they usually just relay information, not conduct actual research. I only trust information that provides sources I can vet.

[ROMARY]

And then there are reliable world-wide research(s). 

I've looked into various international associations (medical, etc.) for others and found a few/several interesting remedies/information/etc., etc. 

Often times info that I hadn't previously heard about.