#debunking

[isitcorrect]

Something unremittingly bleak about a goddamn country starting "crisis actor" conspiracy theories to deny their crimes. A term invented to deny the deaths of children at Sandy Hook in 2012 is now used to deny the deaths of children in Gaza in 2023.

As the community note says, this isn't a crisis actor. This is a guy who posts on Instagram. A influencer who posts videos online of breaking events...is seen at a lot of breaking events. To Israel, this is a sign of a conspiracy. In fact, some of those images aren't even him, or aren't even related to Palestine at all; one image included in other posts targeting Saleh Aljafarawi is a Halloween costume from Thailand. That article says "pro-Israeli accounts" tweeted this, but it's the literal, official Twitter account of Israel posting this shit, next to their comedy sketches that somehow make trans people the punchline bc fascists only have one joke the whole world wide I guess

Like. It's not new for a government to deny the reality of its atrocities. It is new for that government to outright use a conspiracy theory term devised by Alex fucking Jones, or to, when called on doing so, defend it as a "meme" (also bizarre to see hardcore Zionists use a term crafted for especially antisemitic conspiracy theories). Everything rancid about the world in 2023 congealed into a single tweet, right here

[deputy-videogamer]

Have you seen this tweet/picture providing evidence that UNRA is working with Hamas?

This evidence was created by Dr. Eli David on Twitter proving that Hamas is working with the UNRA on Jan 27 a day after the UNRA announced that nine countries has suspended their funding after accusation of Hamas working for UNRA

Source

When I first saw this post I found this really suspicious as the UNRA had just announced their situation and the allegations against them. So with the help of Reverse Google Images I manage to find out that the so-called "Hamas militants" are actually the Rafah police.

The picture was from the Rafah Police Facebook account with the captions translating saying they are sending aid into Gaza back in Jan 10 on a Facebook post.

Source

As of right now the post has gain over 1 MILLION views, 12.2K reposts, and 381 requotes with NO COMMUNITY NOTES debunking this post.

[marzipanandminutiae]

Logic Exercise

Claim: Victorian socialites often had full sleeve tattoos or chest pieces.

Things to consider:

Would Tattooed Ladies have been as popular a sideshow draw if upper-class, taste-making women had tattoos?

If the tattoos were hidden by clothing as this claim may further state- long sleeves and high necks, what about the most common style of low-necked, short-sleeved eveningwear of the period? Socialites go to many formal events, and while high necks and long sleeves were acceptable for evening, surely many upper-class women avoiding more standard revealing formalwear would have changed the trend or at least warranted notice in fashion publications.

Is the article making this claim accompanied by unsourced photos of women with tattoos in the Victorian era? Should I reverse-image-search them to make sure they aren't...just spitballing here...photos of aforementioned Tattooed Ladies in circuses, divorced from their context?

Does the article cite a newspaper but no letters, diaries, memoirs, or other sources traceable to a specific, named person without conflicts of interest? Were Victorian newspapers known for their credibility and fact-checking?

And most critically, am I believing this just because I want to and ignoring compelling evidence that the whole notion falls apart under the slightest bit of historical understanding or logic?

[creature-wizard]

Here's a resource for folks trying to counter misinformation and promote critical thinking - the 2020 Debunking Handbook

[seriouslycromulent]

Another one I want to save for prosperity.

[bibyebae]

this is an important 2-minute video about the effect of Western media on swaying people to the Israeli side!

please watch and share to educate those who dont know! we are all susceptible to mainstream media

[leveragehunters]

I'm putting my response to this in it's own post. Nothing but respect for the rightful criticisms of the situation described in those articles. The problem is that the articles by Danielle Cahill are grossly, almost negligently, misleading.

I'm not your lawyer and this is not legal advice, but I am an autistic Queensland lawyer who's pretty ticked off at Cahill.

Cahill's articles:

Autistic drivers could find their licences in legal limbo depending on where they live after new standards introduced

New national Fitness to Drive standards are 'discriminatory' and 'humiliating' for autistic drivers, psychologists say

Short version:

If you're autistic you do not automatically have to obtain a medical clearance to hold a Queensland Drivers Licence and there is no 'list of reportable conditions', much less one that includes autism.

Long version with receipts:

The first article purportedly cites a Department of Transport and Main Roads (Transport) spokesperson who they claim said: "…all autistic drivers in Queensland have since 2012 been required to obtain a medical clearance from a doctor to show they are fit to drive." It also says: "In Queensland, the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) requires drivers to obtain a medical clearance form from a doctor confirming they are fit to drive despite being autistic."

The second article says: "According to the state's Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR), autism was added to the list of reportable health conditions in 2012."  Oh, but wait, what's this from just a little further up in the same article? "A TMR spokesperson told ABC News that "there is no specific legislation that states that people with autism cannot drive".

Let's talk about that specific legislation

Despite what the spokesperson said, there was no change to the law in 2012. A new Transport Regulation, which contains the law about medical clearances for Queensland drivers licences, was, however, passed in 2021. (link to the Regulation)

Typo or ignorance? Why not both.

The 2021 Regulation did not substantively change the law. The new Regulation was a consolidation, modernisation, and streamline of multiple pieces of overlapping legislation. (Explanatory notes)

'Jet's Law', which sets the rules for driver medical clearances, was first introduced in 2008. (Ministerial Statement). It was moved from the old Regulation to the new 2021 one essentially unchanged.

Jet's Law in chapter 3, part 6, division 1 of the 2021 Regulation

Jet's Law as passed in the previous Regulation (scroll down to page 64)

The law in Queensland re: medical clearances is the same as it was in 2008. The only changes were to language, consistent with modern drafting standards, and the addition of a requirement to not drive until you've given notice if a condition develops or worsens.  

What does Jet's Law say?

Section 177 of the 2021 Regulation states:

A person who applies for the grant or renewal of a Queensland driver licence must, when making the application, give a notice to the chief executive about any mental or physical incapacity that is likely to adversely affect the person’s ability to drive safely.

Key words: any mental or physical incapacity that is likely to affect the person's ability to drive.

If you're autistic and your autism isn't likely to affect your ability to drive safely, Jet's Law doesn't require you to give notice to Transport.

But what about that list of reportable conditions the article claims exists?

It doesn't exist. There is no list of reportable conditions.

Transport DOES provide some examples of medical conditions that are likely to affect your ability to drive. You can see them here:

https://www.support.transport.qld.gov.au/qt/formsdat.nsf/forms/S5040/$file/S5040.pdf

https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/licensing/update/medical/fitness#medcond

Here's the licence application form: https://www.support.transport.qld.gov.au/qt/formsdat.nsf/forms/qf3000/$file/f3000_es.pdf. Question 7 states that you must report any medical conditions that may adversely affect your ability to drive and asks if you have any of the following conditions:

Vision or eye disorder (other than wearing glasses or contact lenses) that may adversely affect your driving

Diabetes that requires treatment by tablet, insulin or other medication

Been diagnosed with epilepsy, experienced a seizure; or been required to take anti-epileptic medication after the age of 11

Any other medical condition/s that is likely to adversely affect your ability to drive safely

You know what I don't see anywhere? Autism.

But what about the National Standards?

Cahill managed to get that part of the articles almost right.

All Queensland drivers, regardless of age, must meet the national standards to ensure their health or any physical disability does not increase the risk of a crash. (confirmed by Transport) And before you ask, the national standard is not a list of 'reportable conditions'. (Even if it was, the autism update happened in 2022, not 2012). But what is the national standard if it's not a list of reportable conditions?

The national driver medical standards Assessing Fitness to Drive set out the considerations and medical criteria for safe driving. They also guide the management of drivers with health conditions so that they may continue to drive for as long as it is safe to do so. The standards are used by health professionals to assess and manage patients with health conditions that may affect their ability to drive safely. These assessments and the standards themselves inform Driver Licensing Authority decisions about driver licensing.

The national standard does refer to "Other neurological conditions including autism spectrum disorder and other developmental and intellectual disabilities". Yes, it was updated in 2022, as indicated by a big red banner across the top of the page. The update notes state:

The review identified that information and guidance was required to enable assessment of persons with ASD. Specialist advice noted that the variability of ASD characteristics and the degree of severity were too diverse for a specific standard. General guidance is however provided in the text of the chapter.

Wait, the review? The changes were made because of a review? They weren't a secret sneaky change as Cahill alleged? There was a public review that called for submissions from stakeholders?  Yes there was.

The review concluded there was not enough evidence to determine the MVC (motor vehicle crash) risk associated with ASD, and "Specialist advice noted that the variability of ASD characteristics and the degree of severity were too diverse for a specific standard."

So what does the standard actually say about autism?

The impact of other neurological conditions including autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and developmental and intellectual disability should be assessed individually. A practical driver assessment may be required. If the degree of impairment is static, periodic review is not usually required. People with ASD can have differences in social communication and interaction, with restricted and repetitive patterns of behaviour, interest and activities. Although evidence from driving studies are limited, drivers with ASD may drive differently from people without ASD. Shortcomings in tactical driving skills have been observed, while rule-following aspects of driving are improved. There is considerable difference in the range and severity of ASD symptoms, so assessment should focus on these and the significance of likely functional effects, rather than an ASD diagnosis.

So what does that mean?

It means we're right back at Jet's Law, in section 177 of the 2021 Regulation.

If you have a mental or physical incapacity that is likely to affect your ability to drive you need to declare it.

Could this include autism? Yes.

Does it automatically include autism? Not according to any law or standard currently in force in Queensland.

If you're an autistic Queenslander, your obligations under Jet's Law and the update to the national standard mean it's important that you consider whether your autism is likely to affect your driving ability and, if so, declare it. If it's not, then don't.

[Reminder: I am not your lawyer and this is not legal advice]

[spr1ngpvrinbwunnie]

Block me if you think the headcanons about the Aftons are all racist, homophobic, and sexist just because you think it's "accurate and realistic" since this is the 70s - 80s 💀🙏🙏🙏

First of all, why do we have to care about fiction becoming logical? => It's a flaw and full of gaps when you try to make it only correct, thinking it is "canon" over anyone else's headcanon, and "trampling" it in a rude and disrespectful manner.I'll be blunt: you are a pretentious and pathetic person, truly.

And that also diminishes the important characteristic point (small or large) of the character - it shows that you completely miss all the point.

Secondly, don't make me throw the entire novel, the evidence already present in the canon, in your face.Do we really belong to the same fandom???I won't talk about someone saying "William will be Trump's support."

And then his children?? Alright, I find it amusing that some people think William abusing Elizabeth is automatically "sexist." Didn't he abuse all his children equally? In the novel, William also clearly praises Jessica for her sharp intellect and thinks she has an eye for science. I might be wrong, but I'm sure he said something like that to her!

And the most important thing... Lamar is a black character in the first part of the Silver Eyes trilogy, if William were racist, it should have been evident in the part where he was harsh with Lamar, but was William???? NO HE DIDN'T.

And oh, Michael too, most of his friends are of different races, so if he is so racist, why does he hang out with them? Idk what the shit if you thinking something wide- ugh

And if you intend to tell me that "Everyone has their own interpretation." Then SORRY, it's not like you can just spit your shit whatever you want and call it your opinion, headcanon, or interpretation and insist on it like that. At least you should know how to research before speaking, don't just dive in and say something even more ridiculous than others. Don't even dare to act like you know everything especially when you ACTUALLY don't, its fucking cringe

Sorry moots, I'm not in a good mood today, I just can't believe there are people on TikTok with such ridiculous thoughts :// And I'm thinking if there are still people who intend to say that to any Afton fans and just ewwww.

[isitcorrect]

So the right-wing press is currently in meltdown about Queen being cancelled, they're cancelling Queen you guys. Those woke Millennials and Gen Z made them remove "Fat Bottomed Girls" from their Greatest Hits album.

So is this true? Erm, no. What blog do you think this is.

There's a bit of deception in the headline here, which is of course all most people read. "Fat Bottomed Girls cut from Queen's greatest hits to appease younger audience". But if you go on Spotify right now, you'll find several versions of it, still uncancelled and listenable. So what gives?

Well, by "to appease younger audience" they don't mean Millennials or Gen Z. They mean much younger. See, the song was only removed...on a platform for literal children.

Specifically, children 3-12. We're not talking about Millennials (whose youngest members are in their twenties, by the way) being sensitive here, we're talking about eight year olds. Now, whether "Fat Bottomed Girls" is inappropriate for children or not is a discussion you can have, but it's a discussion no one is having, because they're reading a misleading headline designed as right-wing outrage bait, and talking about it as if the song has been banned for everyone, and not been left off one niche music service for grade schoolers. What a sweet life these people lead, you don't have to read anything when you can just get mad over a headline and decide it's the result of whichever group you hate the most

Anyway you can still listen to any Queen song you like, provided you aren't getting your music from one specific website for children

[book-of-forbidden-knowledge]

I'm posting this preemtively, before anyone even thinks of mentioning Ishtar.

[nofatclips-home]

Why nobody told me about Captain Disillusion?!?

[feyres-divorce-lawyer]

🎨: jessamybooks

i got tagged in this, presumably because the person wanted me to debunk it so here we go. (warning long post mostly because of the pictures, putting a break so as to not clog up y’all’s dashes)

the ic’s help for nesta was giving her an ultimatum of going to the house of wind or deportation to the human lands.

mind you, the former is also an isolation with a man she has verbally and physically made clear she wants away from her

“it’s not up for negotiation” again, the ruling power is forcing a war refugee to “choose” between being stuck in a house that would be gruesome to escape from, primarily with a man she wants to be away from and secondarily with another man who’s just as culpable in her imprisonment, and deportation to lands where they know she will be ostracized, subjected to prejudice, friendless, and practically housebound.

furthermore, amren lied about the rules of the night court when nesta rightfully brought up the fact that they were legally not allowed to do this. for all stans like to claim this was just like judge-appointed rehab, within that same modern context, lying about the law to force someone into “rehab” (mind you, through an intervention that had not a single medical professional involved), IS A CRIME

in contrast, nesta’s help for the women in the library was… pinning up a sign-up sheet.

yes, she intentionally practiced in the library, even after clotho asked her not to because it was distracting the priestesses who watched her

however, that was part of her plan to bring cassian down so the priestess could safely see how he trained her given their past terrible experiences with men.

also, there are seven whole chapters between when she puts the sheet up and when gwyn signs up. seven.

and then an additional five chapters when roslin, ananke, and deirdre show up in chapter 29.

ilana and lorelei join in chapter 38.

also note, nesta was going to give up and take down the sheet after her demonstration with cassian because it was her last resort. she still hadn’t physically bothered any of the priestesses, or initiated any unwanted contact.

additionally, clotho, herself, was happy when gwyn signed up.

so let’s review

the ic: forced nesta out of her safe space and demolished it, gave her a hosbon’s choice of training or deportation, and lied to her about their laws to bypass the illegality of their ultimatum

nesta: pinned up a sign-up sheet (which is by definition is voluntary), never physically bothered any of the priestesses or pestered them into signing up, and found a way to assuage any fears about a man training them without directly putting them in his way.

there is also a difference in time. the ic gave nesta no time to make her “decision.” she was forced into beginning her training the same day she got the ultimatum. in contrast, the time between when nesta put up the sheet, and when all the known valkyries from the library left the library to train is 21 chapters.

overall, i genuinely don’t think that anyone making this argument actually believes it, because it’s such a gross intentional misunderstanding of how the neo-valkyries came together, and stripping gwyn, roslin, deirdre, ananke, ilana, and lorelei of their personal choice to leave the library.

anyways, byeee

[noneun]

Un esempio di propaganda pro-nucleare

Mi è capitato di nuovo un video dell'Avvocato dell'atomo e, se non fosse che l'argomento è serio, ci sarebbe da ridere. L'argomento principale erano le scorie radioattive.

"Anche gli ospedali producono rifiuti radioattivi di basso e medio livello: che facciamo un referendum per chiuderli?" C'è davvero bisogno di specificare che possiamo produrre energia in tanti modi diversi ma non ci sono alternative agli strumenti diagnostici e alle terapie che fanno uso di materiali radioattivi?

"Il nucleare consuma meno materia per produrre energia". Questa informazione è vera, almeno per ora. Ma non è una argomentazione a favore del nucleare visto che la pericolosità della produzione e dello smaltimento delle scorie non è proporzionale alla massa ma -chi lo avrebbe mai detto- alla pericolosità. Vi piacciono i controesempi banali? È più pericoloso un cuscino di lattice di un kg o un proiettile di 5 grammi di piombo? Da prendere in faccia, intendo.

"Le scorie sono radioattive per millenni, ma non significa che siano pericolose per millenni visto che la radioattività scende con andamento esponenziale negativo". Dipende da che isotopo consideriamo: possiamo andare da un tempo di dimezzamento della radioattività di decine fino a miliardi di anni. E comunque il ragionamento spiegato così non dimostra nulla: nel caso del Cesio 137, con la radioattività che si dimezza ogni 30 anni, se partissimo da un livello 1.000 volte superiore a quello non pericoloso, ci vorrebbero comunque 300 anni prima di tornare a livelli accettabili. Con il Plutonio 239 servirebbero 240.000 anni. Per lo Iodio 129, ci vorrebbero 157 milioni di anni. Senza dimenticare che il livello di radioattività da sola conta poco se non associata al tempo di esposizione: vivere tutta la vita accanto ad un terreno contaminato è peggio che farsi una radiografia.

"Non sappiamo cosa succede in Cina agli acidi di raffinazione delle rinnovabili". Chissà perché i pro nucleare tendono sempre ad attaccare le rinnovabili. Ho notato che solo raramente dicono qualcosa contro i combustibili fossili. Forse perché alla fine si tratta dello stesso tipo di business: estrarre il combustibile da sotto terra e usare una grossa centrale per produrre energia. In ogni caso, invece di chiedere maggiore trasparenza alla Cina, si usa questo come difetto delle rinnovabili, come se non esistessero altri paesi produttori. Chiediamo tracciabilità e normative, non usiamo l’opacità altrui per assolvere un’altra filiera.

"Non sappiamo come vengono stoccati i rifiuti chimici che non durano per millenni ma per sempre". Questa frase, collegata ancora alla Cina, non ha comunque senso di per sé. Si potrebbe ironizzare sull'assoluto "per sempre", ma se vogliamo rimanere seri bisognerebbe almeno indicare di che sostanze stiamo parlando, di quanto a lungo rimangono pericolose. Non tutti i rifiuti sono come i metalli pesanti. E invece, "per sempre" e via.

Infine nei commenti si leggono persone preoccupate per le infiltrazioni mafiose nella gestione delle scorie che vengono puntualmente derise e dirottate su altri contenuti ancora meno seri, senza grandi risposte. Ridicolizzare chi pone la domanda non è un buon segnale. Qualcuno argomenta con "ma anche gli altri paesi hanno le organizzazioni criminali". Mal comune, mezzo cancro?

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by L'Avvocato dell'Atomo (@avvocatoatomico)

[profounddefendorcrusade-blog]

Starlo apologist speaks again

this picture right here.. i hate it sm.

TIME TO DEBUNK EVERYTHIN', YEEHAW!

#1 Starlo's name is uncool on purpose might literally mean 'Starloser' It fits his character arc. In other words, he's not the cool, badass sheriff he pretends to be (he's not 'North Star'), but a kind, friendly farmer inside

#2 He definitely DOES care about Clover. Why else would he keep saying he's proud of them, praise them, believe in them, get worried about their safety, send them a warning letter, immediately run to check what's going on with them, get angry at Clover for not staying HOME (yeah he really did consider the Wild East their home) tell Martlet to bring Clover to safety, and jump at Ceroba to try and protect them? don't question the love of star daddy

#3 Undyne actually IS a badass. Starlo isn't. He's a softie who cares about pretending to be cool bc he's insecure, even when in a situation where he could die. He wants to be a hero. He wants to be SOMEBODY, not a NOBODY. Maybe he also cared about his own status more than his town, friends and family (which could be the reason he brought a bb gun). Or he just wanted to buy time so the others could hide. Now that I think about it, it's the latter. Why else would Dina say this in genocide after you kill Ceroba: "He was more of a hero than you'll ever be." That's the whole point of his geno fight that, and a lil bit of angst when roba finds him dying IT'S CALLED CHARACTERIZATION

#4 He kidnaps Clover bc they're a human. The only human who's ever set foot on the sands of the Wild East. He's obsessed with human culture. His whole life ARE westerns. Why? Whether it's the sense of justice cowboys represent, the exciting lives they live, or both, Starlo feels like he matters thanks to this nerdy interest, like he can contribute to his community

#5 i see Martlet as a big sis not a mom bc of how young she is, despite that one joke in bits & bites, but to each their own Star jails Martlet bc of the potential of the Wild East getting shut down. She did threaten to report them to Asgore and well... according to him, better safe than sorry. He even admitted he doesn't feel right doing it

#6 It WAS wrong of him to blame and attack Clover like that, all for his own status and ego (and to get his friends back) It's called a flawed character making a fucking mistake. Or did you expect someone perfect, with no room to grow and develop throughout the piece of media? Also, Clover is not an infant, they're a child. If it was meant to be a joke, it ain't funny bucko

#7 he either actually forgot about the fact he himself kidnapped Clover bc he wasn't in the right mindset (understandable), or purposefully ignored the information to avoid responsibility for his actions & shift the blame onto Clover (he IS flawed and thats more than ok)

#8 in neutral, he doesn't apologize bc Ceroba doesn't come and snap him out of his fantasy & mindset

#9 he did his best with the apology. you can't blame starlo. He's not very good with expressing himself and emotions in general (that he has been avoiding for so long via escapism; he also uses escapism to help Ceroba instead of talking openly with her)

#10 he doesn't know how the ceroba & clover interaction played out bc he was unconscious. Maybe he thought Clover had managed to talk her outta fighting. He says in true pacifist "Yall had a fight?? and the deputy won??" In other words he didnt know they had even fought. To add fuel to the fire, his bff just died and star, being the forgiving sweetheart he is, had wanted to give her a chance at redemption, but never got the chance to. He never got the chance to say goodbye, either.

#11 just bc starlo's an adult doesn't mean he can't have these flaws/behaviors. Every individual is unique. Starlo is deff deeply insecure and most likely autistic, too. Please think about that in the future, thank you

my current feelings can best be described by good old Axis

[jakes-personal-blog]

Not only that you do NOT know what punk means, but everything you said can be easily debunked.

“appropriating cultural beliefs”, oh, you're talking about tulpas? Tulpamancy is NOT a closed culture since no Buddhistic practice was EVER called like this. Ans Buddhism is NOT a closed culture.

https://www.tumblr.com/sophieinwonderland/730911019702091776/1-unless-youre-a-tibetan-buddhist-monk-you-are?source=share

https://www.tumblr.com/sophieinwonderland/706426041178161152/please-stop-claiming-to-be-plural-having-your?source=share

Saying it is one is like saying French culture is a closed one.

“harassing people with stigmatized disorders” I would like to see proofs of that. On the other hand, anti endos are constantly calling (pro)-endos delusional, schizophrenic, psychotic, and sometimes even the r-slur.

“forcing people out of their own spaces” I would also like yo see proofs. If you're talking about the "systempunk": you can't be punk if you are anti-endo and invading bigotry "safe places" is not bad.

https://www.tumblr.com/sophieinwonderland/753722190440120320/hey-coming-from-an-endogenic-system-could-you?source=share

Meanwhile, anti-endos are actively invading the pluralgang, plural, actuallyplural and such tags when they are pro-endo.

Here is the definition of punk:

Here are posts to see why anti-endo CANNOT be punk.

https://www.tumblr.com/sophieinwonderland/753174875230896128/hey-can-any-sysmeds-help-me-understand-punk?source=share

https://www.tumblr.com/luckyclovercollective/753275115953897472/your-hate-isnt-punk?source=share

Another stuff: misinformation about the origins of system hopping can be easily debunked.

https://www.tumblr.com/sophieinwonderland/723578202940899328/actually-anti-misinformation-system-hopping-was?source=share

(Most sources are from @sophieinwonderland , one of the source is from @luckyclovercollective though.).