Do
not quote my words and then edit them to mean something I did not say, and especially to mean what
you want them to mean. To do so is to invent a lie. And especially in the context of your reply, it is a clear indication of someone who would rather believe the lie rather than the truth. You may think it's cute. It's not. It's lame, immature and ignorant. If you want to edit my words to mean what you prefer they mean, then state the words your own self and take credit for them.
Ironically, considering the true definition of "truth" as illustrated below, the edited words you came up with actually make my point. <snort>
When you swear in court to tell the truth, what you're doing is giving your opinion about the facts at hand.
True, but more to the point, and more importantly, you are swearing under oath not intentionally tell a falsehood, an untruth, a lie, not to perjure yourself.
The facts of the case is that Mr Jones was shot. Mrs Smith swore to tell the truth, and stated that she saw Mr Green shoot Mr Jones. However, Mr Green looks like Mr Popodopolus, who owns the gun that shot Mr Jones. Now, Mrs Smith's truth and fact are in conflict, aren't they?
Possibly, but there's not enough information to know for sure. Assumptions must first be made. But, if they are in conflict, then it's a perfect example of someone's
belief turning out to not be true.
But, as presented, it's also a great example of making assumptions and jumping to a conclusion based not on the facts or the truth, but on a belief or a theory. To wit: the fact that Mr. Popodopolus owns the gun that that shot Mr. Jones is not
proof that Mr. Popodopolus is the one
who pulled the trigger. Mr. Green may very well have had Mr. Popodopolus' gun in his possession and killed Mr. Jones with it. In order to reach a valid conclusion as who who pulled the trigger, more evidence must be presented and examined.
no. You're confusing truth with fact. Truth is a belief. Fact is just that... Fact.
Now you're rationalizing by inventing new definitions for words. That's the hallmark of a desperate truther (or more commonly known - a wacko).
Truth:
1. The true or actual state of a matter.
2. Conformity with fact or reality.
3. A verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like.
—Synonyms
1. fact. 2. veracity. 7. sincerity, candor, frankness. 10. precision, exactness.
—Antonyms
1. falsehood. 2, 4, 7. falsity.
So right there truth is defined as a verified fact.
Something that's been proven is fact.
I know, I just said that. But it's not true, either, unless it's been proven to be true. Something unproven is simply a theory. A theory with actual conclusions drawn in the absence of facts is a belief. We simply don't know for sure one way or the other unless and until facts are presented to confirm or refute the theory. Either something is true, or it is not. It is either TRUE or FALSE. Anything in between the absolutes of TRUE and FALSE is just a theory. Whatever that theory may be, regardless of which "side" you are on, once the facts are presented, the theory
must be changed to fit the facts. The entire theory doesn't necessarily have to be changed, only that part which is contradicted by the facts.
Fact is that a plane flew into each of the #1 and #2 towers. Truth on your part is that islamic terrorists flew those planes. Truth on my part is that islamic terrorists flew those planes. Fact is, we were not on those planes, have no video from onboard those planes, and therefore, we have our truths... Not fact.
No, we have our beliefs. As the definition of "truth" clearly states, truth conforms to fact or reality, to the actual state of the matter. In order to say it is a
truth that Islamic terrorists flew those planes, then that statement
must conform to the facts and reality, to the actual state the matter, and be a verified and indisputable fact. If it fails to do any of the above, it's not a truth, it's a belief, or a theory.
But the fact (or truth, if you prefer) is, we know from telephone conversations from those on board the planes, from the past histories of the men involved in flying the planes, from admissions from others who were involved (including video of bin Laden made prior to 911 in which he stated how he got the idea in the first place), and from the writings of some of the men themselves, that they were Muslim extremists executing a Jihad. This evidence is indisputable, which makes is the truth.
When someone believes something really,
really,
really hard, in their mind it can actually become true. Doesn't make it true, tho. Doesn't even make it "a truth". But they want it to be true, they
need it to be true. It's hard for someone to admit they believe in something that's not true. They need it to be true so badly that they will reason and rationalize, even to the point of dismissing real truth if it doesn't fit with their belief. It takes a lot of balls to believe so strongly in something and then to suddenly have to go, "I was wrong". Not many people can do that. To dismiss the truth and hold on to the lie is actually easier. It's not very smart, but it's easier.
I guess everyone who has an opinion is a "truther", because all of their truths are right to them.
No. Re-read what I wrote. "They are called "truthers" because they confuse "belief" and "truth", and think that
because they believe it, therefor it is true, and no amount of
real, actual truth will convince them otherwise." To have an opinion is one thing, even if it's wrong. There's nothing wrong with having a wrong opinion, just as long as when facts are presented that disprove part or all of your opinion (or theory, or belief), that you are able change your opinion to match the truth. But the truthers refuse to admit they are wrong, ever, even when indisputable facts prove otherwise.
i don't know about no irrefutable evidence.
Of that I'm quite certain.
That kinda went up (or down) with the buildings, didn't it? Again... It's someone else's truth. I don't confuse that with fact.
Clearly, you do confuse the two. You even confuse your own truth with fact.
People get away with hiding fact, and calling their version truth everyday.
Yes, they do. There's actually a term for that. It's called a
lie.
Another case:
Opinion - Global warming is fact.
Truth - Global warming is fact, due to several scientists saying it is.
Fact - We don't know the facts of global warming, since we were not there throughout history; and we do not possess the technology to prove it beyond a doubt.
Your "Fact" down there is missing a lot of facts. We don't need to have been there throughout history, we have archaeological evidence that indisputably shows historical weather and temperature cycles. We know, for a fact, that the Earth has been warming since the last major ice age, and more importantly since the last mini ice age which occurred during the American Revolutionary War.
Global Warming is not an opinion, it's a verifiable fact.
Your "Truth" above is an argument for "truth" being dependent on how many people might believe it, but truth does not change because it is or is not believed by a majority, or even a select minority of the people. You're confusing belief and truth again.
To more accurately state your example, it would have to be:
Opinion: Humans and human activity is the primary cause of Global Warming and/or Climate Change that we are seeing today.
Truth: Human activity has had a measurable impact on the amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases found in the atmosphere and oceans.
Fact: We do not know the extent of the impact, if any at all, that humans have or can make on the Global Warming we see today, as what we are experiencing may simply be part of the normal warming and cooling cycle the planet has undergone for eons and may very well have happened with or without our influence.
-----
OK, boys and girls, what have we learned today? We have learned that just because you say something is true, it doesn't make it true. We also learned that just because you and a bunch of other people think something is true, that doesn't make it true, either. And we learned that if you believe in something, or have a theory about something, even if you believe really, really
a lot that it's true, calling it "a truth" doesn't make it
a truth or
the truth, much less a fact. In addition, we learned that "truth" and "fact" are synonyms for each other, and both must conform to reality, to the actual state of a matter, and be indisputable and verifiable.
