Comment by dijit

16 hours ago

Nobody cherry-picked anything. Per capita, single-event, it's the number that answers the claim that was actually made — that October 7th was a "blip."

What you're doing now is a different argument entirely: aggregate conflict deaths over 77 years vs. one morning. That's not context, it's a category error dressed up as one.

For what it's worth, the full Palestinian death toll since 1948 is ~136,000 [1] — a Palestinian source, so spare me the bias complaint. That's across eight decades, multiple Arab-Israeli wars, three intifadas, and several state actors. October 7th still isn't a blip. It's a massacre inside a war.

Which is exactly what everyone's been saying.

[1] https://english.wafa.ps/Pages/Details/145161

> What you're doing now is a different argument entirely:

I've not made an argument. I've provided the proper context that supports the original point.

>> Considering the scale of suffering caused by this conflict, - Jasonadrury

your response:

> That's not context, it's a category error dressed up as one.

You have shifted goalposts in every post. The context was the conflict in aggregate. Continue arguing with yourself. It's not compelling.

  • "I've not made an argument" is a fascinating claim immediately after quoting someone who used aggregate scale to call October 7th a "blip"- and agreeing with them.

    Providing context in support of a conclusion is making an argument. That's what arguments are.

    The goalposts that moved: "blip" (single event framing) -> "scale of the conflict" (aggregate framing) -> "I wasn't arguing anything." Three posts, three different claims, now apparently none of them count.

    Noted.

What’s an ‘event’?

  • ...

    A discrete incident with a defined start, end, perpetrator and location.

    (As opposed to a 77-year conflict involving multiple states, wars and actors.)

    Now ask me one on sport.

That is pretty much the definition of cherry picking right there.

You sure have a big stake in defending a genocide, Jan.