Doing gods work, boy.

too old

I was once like you, but now I religiously post the source to this image wherever it arises.

Doing gods work, boy.

color me unconcerned

I'm insinuating you sound juvenile.

color me unconcerned

Nah, I've got an anon that always thumbs me down every applicable chance, as well as that other guy.

I tried though.

An anon voted you down, so I voted you back up,

No one likes us here anyway

Nah, I've got an anon that always thumbs me down every applicable chance, as well as that other guy.

I tried though.

You realize youre on FJ ?

There is a reason why academic papers and sites like wikipedia lists their sources. If it simply said "try google. lel". The story woudn't seem very trustworthy. And also what #17 said...

yeah, but sources like wikipedia and academic papers are sources of intensive research over a specific subject, and you need sources because, since other people will likely use your information as a source itself, you need to prove that you actually did some godamn research and didnt make shit up.


This isn't an academic source or some shit, its a fucking FJ tumblr post. it's an interesting annecdote that you either thumb and move on or say "huh, that's interesting, is that true?" If you care enough to want the source, then either you care enough to read it too, or you wouldn't read it anyway and you're just a gian asshole "you" as a general term, btw ... and if you care enough to read the source, literally just google it. This is more akin to your friend telling you some story or something that starts with "I read somewhere..." or "I heard..." Would you yell at them to cite their sources or shut up? No, if you care you do your own godamn 5 seconds of googling, or (like most people) you say "huh, neat" and move on, your life not noticeably impacted in any fucking way.

Burden of proof doesn't apply because they aren't trying to make you believe anything, they're telling a story.

NOT TO MENTION, who the fuck is he asking for sources from? The original Tumblr post didn't have them. So who is he asking, the FJ OP? one of us? He's just trying to get other people to do his googling for him, which is fuckin lazy.

TLDR: asking for sources on this is innane, petty, and actually logically wrong.

Oily is asking one of us to find it so not everyone has to waste time googling 'octopuses' to find out it's BS. It's as simple as that

Then don't post "interesting facts from tumblr", and then green-thumb it.

because, as he is not the one making the claims, he does not need to find the evidence himself.
the burden of proof is on the accuser

if you can't show me the evidence, and instead tell me to "google it yourself", i have the right to assume you have no evidence

I mean nobody here is making the claim. It was on Tumblr. Thus the obligation to provide source falls on everyone equally, and since he is the one asking for it... well you get where i'm going.

But this is not some courtcase or academic paper, this is a tumblr post on funnyjunk.

If he makes this comment and someone respond to it with a source it will save a lot of time for everyone one on this site. moreover if there's no source no one will try to look for something that doesn't exist.

Existence is a debate. It applies.

That's old news. o_o

Watch that edge you might cut yourself.

But the one making the claims isn't even here, so really he's just asking one of us to find the evidence the same way he would so that he doesn't have to.

I think, at some point, if you think, "Huh, I wonder if that's true," you need to take it upon yourself to look it up. It is a minuscule expenditure of effort to google "octopus red light annoyed"
BOOM, first result [0].
I'm not asking you to conduct original research here. I'm not pulling a fermat and saying "I have proof I just can't show you." I'm saying that it's trivial to check your own suspicions and then post the source you found yourself.

oily

[0] www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3328480/Otto-the-octopus-wrecks-havoc.html

check the rest of the convo.

I mean, humans learn to speak through unconscious example. I don't find the distinction too important here. In fact, both would be incredibly interesting.

the one spot i didnt look for...


still. its wikipedia article, and on top of that the whole thing is spitted as an off hand remark..is there anything more solid to it?

books.google.com/books?id=_VN2QrM03MAC&pg=PA281#v=onepage&q&f=false

check the sources that wikipedia lists. C'mon man.

check the rest of the convo.

I like you

journalist