

You keep handwaving Kirk being a moral monster who was actively making the nation and the world a significantly more hostile & dangerous place for millions of disadvantaged human beings as “You just disagree with him.” Why?
I forgot my peaches


You keep handwaving Kirk being a moral monster who was actively making the nation and the world a significantly more hostile & dangerous place for millions of disadvantaged human beings as “You just disagree with him.” Why?


An assumption of 99% false sightings is not a statistic. Statistics are analyses of measured data, not assumptions. To know the actual percentage of true sightings, you’d first have to confirm that some sightings are actually true, which would require some actual evidence of ghosts/aliens.
Consider the inverse for a moment: if ghosts/aliens don’t actually exist, then the percentage of false sightings must be 100%, not 99.9%. As long as you start with the assumption that there are some true sightings, you’re just starting with the assumption that ghosts/aliens are real.
Kirk wasn’t just some “talking bobblehead,” he was a moral monster with a large following who was actively making the nation and the world a significantly more hostile & dangerous place for millions of disadvantaged human beings. The fact that his voice will no longer be a part of the national discourse is an unambiguously good thing and is worth celebrating, and I refuse to be ashamed for doing just that.