返回列表 回覆 發帖

[發問] 翁永源強姦未成年少女後交出教會求情信已經無晒新聞連結

本帖最後由 kam 於 2026/3/23 17:23 編輯

#57
「都唔知做乜要故弄玄虛咩「第一二三手資料」
個題目就好簡單
強姦犯翁永源交出教會求情信嘅新聞連結無咗,只剩討論區痕跡
而我後來再補充呢單新聞係我親眼所見(你可以唔信)
次次長篇大論又離題浪費別人睇嘅時間仲迫人逐點回應」

基督徒:「你想人地喺缺乏其他證據時選擇"信你"」
基督徒返教會叫啦
回覆 141# kam

係呀,個題目就好簡單㗎。

問多兩問咪暴露你連第一二三手資料啲正統歷史學說都唔識分囉。
都講左囉,你冇興趣討論呢啲學術野你咪唔好回唔好討論囉。
做咩啫又要走黎屈人話你"唔求真"?你咁想表現到自己好鬼求真,程度好高,咪走去發展吓啲興趣囉。
既要又要,跌落地都死要拿返咋沙?
講左我都傾向信啦,得未呀?
新聞連結都唔係「第一手資料」啦
你叫我訂明報
但明報只睇到三年內
基督徒返教會叫啦
回覆  kam
明顯係你連歷史學 / 知識論中嘅"求真治學"係有程度之分都唔清楚
jimmychauck 發表於 2026/3/23 08:08

你咁講求真,不如幫大家講下呢D係唔係真理︰
1. 屁眼教主屌自己老母、屌個細路屎窟,係咪真理﹖
2. 「三位」如何能「一體」﹖
3. 信耶穌真能「永遠不見死」﹖
4. 信耶穌就「永不饑渴」﹖
5. 信耶穌可以移山倒海﹖
6. 信耶穌唔怕食毒藥﹖
7. 信耶穌就天下無敵﹖
8. 信耶穌唔怕「踩蠍子同蛇」﹖
9. 信耶穌能講外邦語﹖
10. 有病俾鬼徒摸下就好﹖
回覆 144# 旁觀者
對於自己講完野當放屁,我講完佢都當放屁嘅人,冇需要。你返鄉下練字啦。
阿柒頭,屁眼教主「復臨」,你千祈唔好放屁呀。
回覆 143# kam

你可摸耳去讀吓書,搞清楚咩叫第一二三手資料先再出聲?我唔係第一次提你。
請回應#138
基督徒返教會叫啦
AI 概覽



+6
歷史第一手資料(Primary Source)是指在所研究的歷史事件發生時、由事件當事人或目擊者直接記錄下來的原始資料。這些資料未經後人詮釋,具備真實性、原始性與直接證據價值,如日記、書信、檔案、照片、文物、考古遺存等。其主要價值在於客觀呈現歷史現場,是重建歷史真實的基礎。
香港教育城
香港教育城
+6
以下是詳細分類與舉例:
文字檔案類 (Documents):
私人文件: 日記、書信、回憶錄(事件當時或不久後記錄)、手稿。
政府與機構檔案: 稅務記錄、執照、官方公文、會議紀錄、普查數據。
出版物: 當時的報紙報導、專著、宣言、演講稿。
實物與考古類 (Artifacts):
遺物與文物: 瓷器、錢幣、工具、衣服、武器。
遺蹟: 古建築、遺址、遺體、化石。
影像與口述類 (Audio/Visual & Oral):
影像: 照片、錄影帶、錄音帶、電影膠捲。
藝術: 畫作、雕塑、地圖。
口述: 當事人的親身敘述、採訪錄音、民間故事的原始記錄。
香港教育城
香港教育城
+3
一手資料與二手資料的區別:
一手資料: 原創、直接(如:目擊者證詞、當事人的信件)。
二手資料: 轉載、詮釋(如:後人的歷史專著、評論、歷史教科書)。
AJE润色
AJE润色
+1
研究歷史時,一手資料因具時空同步性,通常被認為比二手資料更具權威性與可信度。
基督徒返教會叫啦
回覆 148# kam

哇咁仔細要回#138呀?

2. 我唔知你有冇批評別人"匿喺邊度邊度反共有鬼用"嘅資格,你冇講我唔敢再講落去,一陣又俾你數
3. 你冇講自己有冇資格批評我唔遵守"是就是不就不",我唔敢再講落去,一陣又俾你數
jimmychauck 發表於 2026/3/6 22:13


可摸耳請你回應左#54先?係咪有路加6:31㗎?定係你覺得因為係耶穌講嘅所以你冇需要?last time I checked 54 is less than half of 138.
即係準備唔答?
基督徒返教會叫啦
有咗fake news
報紙報道仲應唔應該算「第一手資料」值得質疑
雖然AI話仲算,我個人就覺得唔算

AI 概覽



+6
Fake news significantly impacts newspapers as a historical primary source, but rather than rendering them useless, it necessitates more rigorous source criticism. While newspapers offer valuable first-hand accounts of past perspectives, intentional disinformation—ranging from propaganda to distorted facts—challenges the ability of researchers to distinguish truth from fabrication.
University World News
University World News
+2
Impact on Newspaper as a Primary Source:
Challenges of Reliability: Historical newspapers, like modern ones, often contain biases, yellow journalism, and outright lies, making them challenging as objective records of "facts".
Shaping Perspective: Fake news reveals how public opinion was manipulated in the past, serving as a primary source for the study of propaganda rather than the events themselves.
Increased Need for Verification: Modern historians and researchers must employ heightened critical thinking to analyze newspapers, comparing them with other sources to verify facts.
Long-Term Impact: The, Foreign Policy Research Institute notes that "fake history" can shape national identities.
The Gale Review
The Gale Review
+6
Historical Context:
Fake news is not new; it has existed for centuries as "erroneous reporting" or propaganda.
While an old problem, modern fake news spreads with unprecedented speed, scale, and digital, Network of Concerned Historians reports.
The Gale Review
The Gale Review
+2
Role of Newspapers in Historical Research:
Despite these challenges, newspapers are generally still considered primary sources because they represent contemporary records of their time, offering insight into public perception and "alternative truths" from that era.
基督徒返教會叫啦
同一個AI又咁答

AI 概覽



+5
Newspapers are considered secondary sources because they often interpret, analyze, or summarize events, rather than providing direct, firsthand evidence, notes Scribbr. Reporters typically synthesize information from eyewitnesses or official reports rather than being the direct participants themselves, presenting a second-hand account.
LibGuides UFV
LibGuides UFV
+3
Here is why newspapers are categorized as secondary sources:
Interpretation and Analysis: Articles often go beyond reporting facts to explain, analyze, or provide context, which constitutes interpretation.
Synthesis of Information: Journalists often take multiple viewpoints and sources (interviews, documents) and synthesize them, making it a secondary analysis.
Temporal Distance: If an article is written after an event—for example, an anniversary piece, editorial, or retrospective—it is analyzing a past event rather than reporting a current one.
Second-Hand Reports: A journalist reporting on an accident they did not personally see, but rather described based on interviews, is providing a second-hand account.
Leddy Library
Leddy Library
+3
Important Distinctions:
Primary Scenario: A newspaper article can be a primary source if it is an eyewitness account, a report written directly from the scene, or an original interview.
Context Matters: A newspaper from 1860 is a primary source for that time period. In contrast, a 2026 article explaining the 1860 event is a secondary source.
Opinion Pieces: Editorials and opinion columns often act as secondary sources because they represent an analysis or viewpoint about a topic.
基督徒返教會叫啦
本帖最後由 jimmychauck 於 2026/3/25 22:49 編輯

回覆 151# kam
都係果句,我唔敢假設你有資格問我"係咪準備唔答"。
你首先講吓你係咪有資格問我"係咪準備唔答"先啦。

你好唔鍾意我次次咁樣問返轉頭嘅,好簡單㗎咋,你上次話我"假設左太多,假設你接觸左好多世界有資格批評我",你道歉收返呢句,我咪唔洗再用依個"唔假設你有資格"原則囉。

點啫?可摸耳請你回應左#54先?都有個先來後到長幼有序㗎嘛。你以為你老幾呀,個論壇你行晒㗎?唔洗禮尚往來㗎?奉旨要答你㗎?占某人日日都碎碎念㗎啦:"言論自由,從來都唔包一定有人答你嘅享受㗎",呢條道理,我素來都套用埋路加6:31㗎,我點量俾人,人咪點量俾我囉。其實,你答唔答#54,我真係有咩所謂?果啲咩李瘋旁觀BBC聖逃網主,不知幾多野唔答我啦,你以為多你一個多幾多?
可唔可以歸納為唔答呢?
基督徒返教會叫啦
回覆 155# kam

咁你唔答,我冇辦法,都冇所謂。

都係果句,我唔敢假設你有資格問我"係咪準備唔答"。
你首先講吓你係咪有資格問我"係咪準備唔答"先啦。
可唔可以進一步歸納為答唔到?
基督徒返教會叫啦
#17 我:「叫你多啲接觸世界接觸世界就必然係等於我自稱接觸世界多,呢啲推論就係你嘅水平?… …」
你話我講「假設左太多,假設你(我)接觸左好多世界有資格批評我(你)」

會唔會你記錯?定我講過唔記得?請提供證據
基督徒返教會叫啦
回覆 158# kam

當日我一讚你"接觸世界好多",你立即好大反應咁話"你[阿kam]從來冇話自己接觸世界多"

本身我睇得起你以為你有資格咋。OK,我睇錯你,我道歉,Sorry,我唔知你其實原來冇資格去咁樣批評其他人。
我呢,就唔係共產黨,唔會認定左邊啲人有咩特質就無視一切其他嘅證據總之就依法治國鋤死佢,我一來唔會對你有任何形式嘅刑罸,二來呢我好講道理,你澄清左啦,大家三口六面講清楚啦咪冇問題囉。
OK,sorry,我以後唔會預設你有資格批評我,一定會問清楚你喺批評我嘅事上其實本身有冇資格先。就好似咁
jimmychauck 發表於 2026/3/2 00:21


嗱,我錯誤地假設你喺你所講嘅事情上有資格批評我,我早三個星期已經提左出黎啦。
你對之完全冇反駁,我中間亦數次按我所承諾嘅,"問清楚你喺批評我嘅事上其實本身有冇資格先",你從來冇反對㗎。

所以,"我錯誤地假設你喺你所講嘅事情上有資格批評我",呢個,係你咁耐都冇去/冇法去/冇膽量去/冇誘因去反對㗎嘛,呢個原則我用左咁耐你都冇反對㗎啦。

宜家,我又宜家,又用子集關係,將"你喺你所講嘅事情上",嘅其中一樣,"接觸世界多唔多",替換入去,你又認為唔啱啦咩?

嗱,呢啲野叫左你答,叫左幾個星期啦,咩啫?#22呀,仲前過#54呀,可唔可以歸納為唔答呀?可唔可以進一步歸納為答唔到?

OK,話係"你講嘅"唔準確,sorry,我修正囉,你唔係講,你係"指出"。
嗱,我跟左呢個你指出嘅原則玩左咁耐,你宜家係咪一個唔該就諗住隨手推翻佢?我話你知,離教者主家網主,係從來俾唔到討論嘅原則嘅。我作為一個非常守原則嘅人,就用左一條按你說話derive出黎嘅原則同你玩左咁耐,你當刻又唔答又唔澄清,佔盡左三個星期便宜啦,宜家你同我三口六面講清楚,呢條原則到底從今開始係咪再適用,同一啲五時花六時變一時一樣為左鬧交修改原則嘅廢物討論呢,就費時失事嘅。

你大把野唔答,係冇資格問我乜野唔答嘅。我唔答你,係因為你冇禮貌,冇禮尚往來。要答你,容乜易。
「宜家」仲係唔係「從來」?
基督徒返教會叫啦
返回列表
高級模式 | 發新話題
B Color Image Link Quote Code Smilies
換一個