Message from @AdvanceManExtraordinaire

Discord ID: 783042768603840623


2020-11-30 18:48:16 UTC  

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire Yes. It is also possible that aliens counted them, regardless of whether anyone makes that claim. It isn't 'Everything allegation is true until proven wrong.' Not for me. You asked. I answered.

2020-11-30 18:48:18 UTC  

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire again that’s for the people making the allegation. Come up with something that can’t be explained away

2020-11-30 18:48:39 UTC  

they cant and wont, they dont understand fundamentals of math and law, and all they can do is accuse people with a different viewpoint of being brainwashed and propagandized. people to the right of them have an astounding level of burden of proof, and eveyr time you reach it more expectations are put on to you to prove your point. there is no use trying to reason with these people. their lack of self awareness is enough for the politically moderate to see how biased and wrong they are.

2020-11-30 18:48:39 UTC  

I'll check out the video though

2020-11-30 18:48:51 UTC  

This guy tackles that and uses state data nor city data

2020-11-30 18:48:53 UTC  

AZ hearing boring and copy of PA hearing

2020-11-30 18:49:16 UTC  

Thabks! I dont like being lied to, so if that guy is... ill def change my view

2020-11-30 18:49:26 UTC  

Feel free to pm me if you watched it

2020-11-30 18:49:26 UTC  

If you can’t define what it would take to change your mind, then there’s no point in trying to change it because it is not based in fact, it’s based on ideology.

2020-11-30 18:49:27 UTC  

Debate aside, does this woman sound credible in any way?

2020-11-30 18:49:34 UTC  

People who think benfords law don’t understand it’s not proof of anything and a weak indicator for elections

2020-11-30 18:49:48 UTC  

The slides in the AZ testimony though are local not statewide

2020-11-30 18:50:00 UTC  

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire I'm fine with that.

2020-11-30 18:50:05 UTC  

bro it isn't a mathematical law

2020-11-30 18:50:20 UTC  

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire the same would apply for accusations of fraud if you can’t prove it you are just hoping to convince people it exists with explanations that can easily be explained away

2020-11-30 18:50:33 UTC  

it is an empirical observation that was observed that appeared to be true in many cases

2020-11-30 18:51:50 UTC  

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire Rather, I'm fine with you thinking that but I disagree that you have any basis to claim ideological bias. Wanted to clarify.

2020-11-30 18:51:50 UTC  

I literally made a test

2020-11-30 18:52:09 UTC  

you can play with the distribution and see when Benford's law applies and when it doesn't

2020-11-30 18:52:24 UTC  

I would say for me, what I would need to be convinced that there was widespread election fraud would be sworn witness testimony that HAS to be in line with the observed vote counting data. Further, there should be a pattern across several states in which the witness testimony and voting data all coincide with each other.

2020-11-30 18:52:24 UTC  

if you try to apply Benford's law to any narrow distribution, it won't work

2020-11-30 18:52:43 UTC  

also, it requires more than "69 samples" to work

2020-11-30 18:53:06 UTC  

I'll give this guy a watch when I have time

2020-11-30 18:53:20 UTC  

so american prosecutors and other LEO agencies branded this as a mathematical law to justify building cases against corporations and dictating foreign policy? then suddenly after nov3 2020 it was no longer a reasonable or valid indicator ?

2020-11-30 18:53:38 UTC  

wouldnt surprise me honestly

2020-11-30 18:53:42 UTC  

no

2020-11-30 18:53:44 UTC  

It people coming up with excuses after the fact. Again affidavits mean nothing If they can’t be proven true or false. You don’t get in trouble for something than can’t be observed or verified. So far that is all what the affidavits claim. @AdvanceManExtraordinaire

2020-11-30 18:53:47 UTC  

Thabks! And let me know because you do seem knowledgeable.

But this vid goes into what you vring as counter

2020-11-30 18:54:00 UTC  

it is called "law" colloquially, it isn't an actual mathematical law

2020-11-30 18:54:11 UTC  

yeah so american officials branded it as a law?

2020-11-30 18:54:13 UTC  

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire Not necessarily across states. They could have targeted different states in different ways. Anyone could have, actually. Point being, each one could be stand alone methodology.

2020-11-30 18:54:24 UTC  

I think in order for one to clear themselves of ideologically driven opinions, they need to identify what specifically would be needed to change their opinion

2020-11-30 18:54:50 UTC  

nothing, these people are the actual drones they claim we are

2020-11-30 18:55:00 UTC  

No, it isn't a mathematical law, nor is it a legal law. It is a colloquial law, like Murphy's law, or Betteridge's law, or Godwin's law

2020-11-30 18:55:01 UTC  

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire Ok I see now. Court ruling.

2020-11-30 18:55:03 UTC  

He does way more than just benfords law as well.

2020-11-30 18:55:17 UTC  

I was about to reference Godwin's law for the meme.

2020-11-30 18:55:18 UTC  

@Maw, you just advanced to level 24!

2020-11-30 18:55:29 UTC  

I agree it’s possible different states would have different fraud methodology, and that’s fine, but it wouldn’t necessarily convince me there was widespread election fraud alone

2020-11-30 18:55:30 UTC  

!rank