Discussion:
Another RECENT Competitor's Response
(too old to reply)
Heron
2019-06-14 15:48:57 UTC
Permalink
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis

Alan Baker
2019-06-14 15:55:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Heron
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis
http://youtu.be/IA3ppfFRq4o
You mean the the video on the official F1 channel?

Did you expect it would disagree?
Bigbird
2019-06-14 17:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Heron
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis
http://youtu.be/IA3ppfFRq4o
You mean the the video on the official F1 channel?
Did you expect it would disagree?
Completely and utterly irrelevant.

YFI
--
Trump fact check:
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Alan Baker
2019-06-14 17:06:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Heron
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis
http://youtu.be/IA3ppfFRq4o
You mean the the video on the official F1 channel?
Did you expect it would disagree?
Completely and utterly irrelevant.
Really?

Considering the source and the source's expected biases is not relevant
in determining the credibility of a source?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Post by Bigbird
YFI
Bigbird
2019-06-14 20:40:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Heron
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis
http://youtu.be/IA3ppfFRq4o
You mean the the video on the official F1 channel?
Did you expect it would disagree?
Completely and utterly irrelevant.
Really?
Considering the source...
A recent F1 driver.
Post by Alan Baker
and the source's expected biases is not
I am not aware on his biases.
Post by Alan Baker
relevant in determining the credibility of a source?
Any reason to suspect his credibility.

You are making a great argument for ignoring all your comments though.
Post by Alan Baker
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Moron.
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
YFI
--
Trump fact check:
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
t***@gmail.com
2019-06-14 23:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Moron.
Looks like you are coming uncunted.
Alan Baker
2019-06-18 03:54:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Heron
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis
http://youtu.be/IA3ppfFRq4o
You mean the the video on the official F1 channel?
Did you expect it would disagree?
Completely and utterly irrelevant.
Really?
Considering the source...
A recent F1 driver.
On Formula1's official YouTube channel.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
and the source's expected biases is not
I am not aware on his biases.
Formula1's biases.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
relevant in determining the credibility of a source?
Any reason to suspect his credibility.
Formula1's credibility.

It's obvious to anyone of even average intelligence that Formula1's
official YouTube channel would not be hosting any video that disagreed
with the decision.
Post by Bigbird
You are making a great argument for ignoring all your comments though.
Post by Alan Baker
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Moron.
Ironic.
Bigbird
2019-06-18 11:23:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Heron
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis
http://youtu.be/IA3ppfFRq4o
You mean the the video on the official F1 channel?
Did you expect it would disagree?
Completely and utterly irrelevant.
Really?
Considering the source...
A recent F1 driver.
On Formula1's official YouTube channel.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
and the source's expected biases is not
I am not aware on his biases.
Formula1's biases.
Even a complete moron might comprehend that that while that they might
think that makes the likely conclusion of the article predictable it
does not undermine it's integrity.

For instance you only quote articles that support your position; does
it follow that they should all be dismissed?
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
relevant in determining the credibility of a source?
Any reason to suspect his credibility.
Formula1's credibility.
It's obvious to anyone of even average intelligence that Formula1's
official YouTube channel would not be hosting any video that
disagreed with the decision.
Well if you think it's obvious then you can assume a lot lower than
average I'm sure. :)

a) It's FOM not the FIA. It is not a given that they will
unquestionably support FIA decisions in all respects.
b) Even someone of ultra low intelligence, a moron say, would not
dismiss the article out of hand regardless of perceived bias or
motivation of the publisher especially if they do not have a very good
reason to question the credibility and integrity of the author.
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
You are making a great argument for ignoring all your comments though.
--
Trump fact check:
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Alan Baker
2019-06-19 16:42:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Heron
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis
http://youtu.be/IA3ppfFRq4o
You mean the the video on the official F1 channel?
Did you expect it would disagree?
Completely and utterly irrelevant.
Really?
Considering the source...
A recent F1 driver.
On Formula1's official YouTube channel.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
and the source's expected biases is not
I am not aware on his biases.
Formula1's biases.
Even a complete moron might comprehend that that while that they might
think that makes the likely conclusion of the article predictable it
does not undermine it's integrity.
For instance you only quote articles that support your position; does
it follow that they should all be dismissed?
No. But I'm a disinterested party. I don't benefit or suffer from
agreeing or disagreeing with the decision.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
relevant in determining the credibility of a source?
Any reason to suspect his credibility.
Formula1's credibility.
It's obvious to anyone of even average intelligence that Formula1's
official YouTube channel would not be hosting any video that
disagreed with the decision.
Well if you think it's obvious then you can assume a lot lower than
average I'm sure. :)
a) It's FOM not the FIA. It is not a given that they will
unquestionably support FIA decisions in all respects.
So can you produce an example of them ever publicly disagreeing with the
FIA over something like this?
Post by Bigbird
b) Even someone of ultra low intelligence, a moron say, would not
dismiss the article out of hand regardless of perceived bias or
motivation of the publisher especially if they do not have a very good
reason to question the credibility and integrity of the author.
I have reason to question the biases of the organization that chose to
publish that analysis and not others.

geoff
2019-06-15 00:17:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Heron
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis
http://youtu.be/IA3ppfFRq4o
You mean the the video on the official F1 channel?
Did you expect it would disagree?
So you are in a considered manner addressing all the points that Palmer
raises, in each of the relevant 'similar' incidents shown ? Or just
summarily dissing it all because of the conspiracy ?

And what would Palmer know anyway ?

geoff
t***@gmail.com
2019-06-15 01:18:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by geoff
So you are in a considered manner addressing all the points that Palmer
raises, in each of the relevant 'similar' incidents shown ? Or just
summarily dissing it all because of the conspiracy ?
And what would Palmer know anyway ?
You said baker is pain.
Now you are egging him on.
Oh my, so phony.
Alan Baker
2019-06-19 16:40:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by geoff
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Heron
2019 Canadian Grand Prix: Vettel Vs Hamilton
And More Jolyon Palmer Analysis
http://youtu.be/IA3ppfFRq4o
You mean the the video on the official F1 channel?
Did you expect it would disagree?
So you are in a considered manner addressing all the points that Palmer
raises, in each of the relevant 'similar' incidents shown ? Or just
summarily dissing it all because of the conspiracy ?
And what would Palmer know anyway ?
geoff
Have you heard the term, "venue shopping"?

:-)
Loading...