You again, 984983.
Quoting: mclarek 981736Me again? What does that mean?
You seem not to be able to hold a neutral position long enough to be able to SORT.
Quoting: mclarek 981736I never claimed a neutral position. Sort what exactly?
What you use the derogatory term "cherry picking" to denote, is merely JUDICIOUSNESS.
Quoting: mclarek 981736It is not a derogatory term, it simply describes the act of picking some claims while ignoring others. Judiciouness requires some evidence for the judiciousness, it implies judgement. Where is it?
"Why accept ANY of it at face value?" No, not at face value, but worth further work. By the way, some things ARE appreciable at face value, but it's true, if one is going to be radically doubtful -- for which I was slammed here -- ANYTHING can be possibly untrue.
Quoting: mclarek 981736There you go with the old anything is possible fallacy. Can you present any actual evidence?
Some of the images are clearly real -- barring some unknown photo-manipulation of excellent fakery level.
Quoting: mclarek 981736How do you know they a clearly real and what exactly are they clearly real images of?
Besides, 984983, these videos are usually done by COMPILERS who BELIEVE something.
Quoting: mclarek 981736Correct, it is a religious belief for them.
They present a mixed bag, to sort through.
Quoting: mclarek 981736No, if they are happy to present photoshopped images then they have no credibility. Why should I waste my time on them when they present known fakes?
If you don't sort, you will never learn if anything is real in it. THAT'S WHY you look anyway.
If George didn't "cherry pick" he'd buy it ALL (mush for brains)! Or NONE (like you, but unjustifiably prejudiced)! Either way, he would be being unscientific in assessing the value of the videos: they are COMPILATIONS and need treatment as such.
You DO know that, right?
Quoting: mclarek 981736The simple fact that the compiler included known fakes is enough to cast doubt on anything else presented. It is not my job to check every single image, the presenter has done enough to sink their own credibility by including obvious fakes to deter me from investing any further effort identifying the othe fakes
