Episode 135 – Based on Future Events

Join us today for a fun and hard-hitting podcast. Bobby and Jordan begin with a public service announcement and move to the important topics of the day, of course always looking forward to hearing from the listeners.

Some people like to listen to us faster… (We sound smarter.):
Change playback speed real time: 1x – 1.25x – 1.5x – 1.75x – 2x

Referenced in the Podcast

This website and podcast contains some quotations and excerpts from copyrighted material. These uses fall well within the copyright doctrine of "Fair Use."

Section 107 of the United States Code, Title 17, specifies the conditions under which, "the fair use of a copyrighted work . . . for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching . . ., scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." It provides four considerations for determining fair use: (1) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes, (2) The nature of the copyrighted work, (3) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and (4) The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work.

The use on this website and podcast of other material is primarily for criticism, comment, news reporting, scholarship or research and teaching. (1) (a) The "purpose and character" of the website, podcast and any derivative book(s) are not commercial. (b) The overwhelming majority of the material is the authors' original work. It is in no way a mere collection of others’ copyrighted works, nor competitive with those sources. (2) The nature of the copyrighted work quoted is often "news" or "history," categories given lesser protection in fair use cases than works of fiction. (3) Most uses involve excerpts rather than entire works.

Because the adverse financial impact on copyright owners is central to the purpose of copyright law, and the analysis of alleged violations, it’s relevant to note that, under factor (4), (a) no one in search of the quoted material would substitute this website, podcast or related book(s) for the original source, (b) it is highly unlikely this website, podcast, or book(s) created from it will ever have more than a de minimis impact on any of the copyright works’ potential market, and (c) to the extent it might do so, it would be far more likely be a positive, rather than a negative, impact (by drawing attention to the work, crediting it, and providing a source where it may be found).

5 Comments

I play the radio July 11, 2023

Mindvirus.show is Q Anon consanguine

I play the radio July 11, 2023

“If you’re drunk, you’re not a good swimmer”
“Based on future events”

JLam July 12, 2023

I know the Ballards as well as other families involved in O. U. R., including some of the rescued children. They are the real deal and doing God’s work.

Also, the version of Little Mermaid I was read as a child ends with her not becoming sea foam as is the common mermaid’s fate, but gaining a soul like humans for her unwillingness to kill the prince and his bride in their sleep. So, not so dark in the end.

Skeptic Reader July 12, 2023

The “Viral TikTok Boat Challenge Leads To ‘Instant Death'” story on ZeroHedge appears to be a case of sloppy reporting, regurgitating a rumor without researching its factuality. This is not the first time that ZeroHedge is guilty of such. It appears that the false story is what went viral, not the stated TikTok trend.

Here’s one report to the contrary that was posted prior to the ZeroHedge report: https://www.al.com/news/2023/07/tiktok-challenge-not-to-blame-for-alabama-drownings-law-enforcement-says.html

While I’m not saying that TikTok users are collectively wise enough to not jump from a speeding boat, they have yet to start this trend. This story also has me wondering about the incidence of broken necks in water skier falls, or perhaps the other way around.

- Jordan July 12, 2023
  
  Thanks for the comment. Zerohedge appears to have relied on an NBC Today story as their source. (They linked to it and pointed to it as a source.) Here is the link. Note the correction that Zerohedge would not have been aware of on the 10th.
  
  https://news.yahoo.com/multiple-people-died-attempting-boat-142247259.html
  
  CORRECTION: July 12, 4:15 p.m. The segment that aired with this story has been removed after the official who blamed four deaths on a social media challenge has now said that he could not say the deaths were linked to the challenge. This article has been updated to reflect the latest information from Alabama law enforcement.
  
  I like Zerohedge because of its role as a “News Aggregator/Summarizer/Commenter.” And, of course, their red/black-pilled perspective… 😉 They rarely do their own reporting. They generally tend to promote stories and subjects that (in my opinion) better reflect what is actually going on in the world than the legacy corporate press. I think this is more an indictment of the sloppiness of NBC.
  
  Should Zerohedge update their story? Maybe? I wonder how many people they have on staff. It’s old news now.
  
  Here is something more recent that doesn’t appear to have made the corporate press: https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/watch-virtue-signalling-environmental-minister-bikes-climate-conference-escort-gas-cars