Philippines says two coast guard vessels damaged by China’s ‘unlawful manoeuvres’, while Beijing says it took ‘control measures’ after vessels illegally entered waters around shoal

Philippines says two coast guard vessels damaged by China’s ‘unlawful manoeuvres’, while Beijing says it took ‘control measures’ after vessels illegally entered waters around shoal

Chinese and Philippine vessels collided on Monday during a confrontation near a disputed shoal in the South China Sea, the two countries said.

Both countries blamed each other for the incident near the Sabina Shoal.

China and the Philippines have had repeated confrontations in the vital waterway in recent months, including around a warship grounded years ago by Manila on the contested Second Thomas Shoal that hosts a garrison. Beijing has continued to press its claims to almost the entire South China Sea despite an international tribunal ruling that its assertion has no legal basis.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    2·
    3 months ago

    the dislocated straws you are grasping at for being too lazy to read a webpage before criticizing it are so illogical and absurd.

    “Do you think that the position that cisgender straight people have the right to exist in public is a biased opinion?”

    strictly to exist?

    no.

    cis straight people have the right to exist in public.

    any other brain busters?

    • Five@slrpnk.netEnglish
      2·
      3 months ago

      Why then is the position that gay people have the right to exist in public a biased opinion?

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        2·
        3 months ago

        It is not a “biased” opinion, but it is certainly a political issue, to keep our topic consistent and hop ahead a few questions.

        would you like to know why?

        I’ll take another turn:

        lgbtq+ prior having the right to exist in public is a political issue because lgbtq+ people have not achieved the unilateral, unchallenged right to exist in public everywhere yet, and overwhelmingly left-leaning political institutions and organizations are committed to extending that right to the lgbtq+ community.

        Those left-leaning organizations are making political stances, engaging in political protest and rallies, passing (political, see where this is going?) legislation, to ensure that the conglomerate minorities of lgbtq+ have the undeniable right to exist in public.

        these political actions are almost exclusively fought for and achieved by left-leaning organizations, resulting in the lgbtq+ movement being justifiably associated with and classified as left-leaning.

        • Five@slrpnk.netEnglish
          1·
          3 months ago

          I’d love to skip ahead, but I’m not confident you know where this is going. We agree that gay people having the right to exist is a political issue, but it’s not a politically biased opinion.

          Is science a political issue? Is it biased to value the authority of scientists on issues like climate change or vaccine effectiveness?

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            1·
            3 months ago

            science is very obviously a political issue.

            amazing.

            that’s what you get for asking ill-defined questions without context.

            please continue.

            you can pretend i answered your straw man the way you wanted me to so that you can eventually, one day limp over to what appears to be coalescing into an inaccurate “gotcha!” based on false premises.

            • Five@slrpnk.netEnglish
              1·
              3 months ago

              I appreciate you expanding on your earlier comment. I’d love for you to elaborate on science the same way you did for lgbtq+

              With the fight to take basic health precautions in the face of a pandemic and acknowledge the reality of climate change championed by Democrats and opposed by Republicans, is the pro-science movement justifiably associated with and classified as left-leaning?

                • Five@slrpnk.netEnglish
                  2·
                  3 months ago

                  Where on the political spectrum do you think Dave Van Zandt classifies organizations that are pro-science, and respect the consensus of experts in the given scientific field?

                  • Varyk@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                    1·
                    3 months ago

                    Rather than personal opinions lacking supporting evidence, let’s look at the data we do have to analyze your baseless implication:

                    Live Science - HIGH
                    science daily - HIGH
                    scientific American - HIGH
                    nature - VERY HIGH
                    NASA - VERY HIGH

                    by your unfounded accusations, van Zandt highly values pro-science news sources.

                    look at all those extra steps you took to get back here and prove yourself wrong. Again.

                    “Scientific studies using its ratings note that ratings from Media Bias/Fact Check show high agreement with an independent fact checking dataset from 2017”

                    https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/2/9/pgad286/7258994?login=false

                    “When MBFC factualness ratings of ‘mostly factual’ or higher were compared to an independent fact checking dataset’s ‘verified’ and ‘suspicious’ news sources, the two datasets showed “almost perfect” inter-rater reliability”