AIBU to be fed up with some posters who cannot accept others have different opinions?

Thats the whole point!!! It was an opinion given as a fact.

Spot on April.
Some people think their opinions are 100% accurate and your opinion is meaningless.
Leave them to it I say.

Come to think of it, how can you form an opinion without any recourse to facts (or fake facts)?

Doesn't forcing facts, or opinions, come across like promoting an agenda opposed to just having a discussion of even a debate?

How can you have a discussion or a debate (a debate being, as I understand it, an exchange where people make a case for something in order to get others to support it) without any recourse to facts?

Trident. and our own government has not been told
If anyone's interested that is not true. The 2 governments had agreed when they were going to make the announcement but nobody told the man in the Senate ( the one who made the announcement)
As stupid and unbelievable as that sounds, that's the truth.

It doesn't seem to matter much to some that when facts are presented, along with evidence, it still isn't enough to "convince" them- Even though convincing others isn't necessary- So why attempt to? Doesn't forcing facts, or opinions, come across like promoting an agenda opposed to just having a discussion of even a debate?

Faced with someone who believes that the earth is flat and puts forward every argument for that view, it is difficult not to laugh in the end jura, or to escape.
However, that harms no-one but themselves.

Take that awful woman on Question Time the other day. It is a fact she is a Tony Robinson supporter and involved in far right politics. It is a fact she was planted by the QT selector, who has close links to the far right. And it is a fact that the opinions she spouted and ranted- were false. We can debate whether, as I believe, that rant was full of hate and racism. I say it was.

People are entitled to have their opinion- but if their opinion defies proven facts- then anyone is entitled to challenge, politely, but robustly if facts continue to be denied.

Is the earth flat? Yes, I believe it is (not).

To some extent, yes. And yet ... if the USA Senate has been told that the US will build the replacement for our nuclear Trident- and our own Government has not been told- and this is published by several reputable sources- then it is fact. We can discuss it- but we can't deny fact.

Even IDS is now saying that we need experts to solve the Brexit mess as there is trouble ahead- those who understand the 'facts' and not the rhetoric.

Doodledog ...I agree with every point you have made. Especially what constitutes a fact is open to debate....according to the sources etc.
People all to easily overlook their internal bias to search out 'facts' that support prejudices.

Whatever anyone thinks about Boris Johnson or Jeremy Corbyn is quite obviously an opinion. Likewise whatever anyone thinks of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex is obviously an opinion, there were a few quite spirited threads about them recently. Some things are facts, BJ is the Prime Minister at present, JC is the Leader of the Opposition, at present anyway, but another fact is that soon someone else will be the Leader of the Opposition. We all know this obviously, so why is it difficult to understand the difference between fact and opinion. I don’t understand why there’s any confusion.

Where has someone spoken to you as if you are stupid?

Doodle I’ve already posted what the factual inaccuracy was.

Okaaay. Well, I have now trawled through your posts on this thread, and found a vague reference to something (presumably on a different thread) about Johnson's grandfather. Is that it? If so, then frankly I am no wiser.

Should we have to read every post on every thread before we can join in without being spoken to as though we are stupid?

Where is all this belittleing and insulting going on?

april rose seemed to have some firm opinions yesterday that BJ was genetically suited to being a leader. They were opinions presented as facts.

This morning off we go on a anti Corbyn post and this oddity.

I dunno? Its all rather weird.

Doodle I’ve already posted what the factual inaccuracy was.

If that’s true ... I expect ball us remainers and left wingers share your opinion. Can’t answer for the ‘other side’ though.

This is a fact

''The UKs nuclear weapons are about to be replaced with US made next gen W93 nuclear warheads.

How do we know this? Because US Head of Strategic Command told the US Senate about the contract....

Before the UK MOD told Parliament or anyone else in the UK!

US elected officials get to know this sort of stuff before UK elected representatives.''

and you can have an 'opinion' about it. I think you can guess what my 'opinion' on the subject is.

Doodle the fact that april got wrong was not open to interpretation or an alternative theory.

Maybe so, but unless what it ist is stated, as opposed to alluded to, how are the rest of us supposed to comment? This is a bit of an 'in with the in crowd' thread, isn't it?

At face value, and as I do not have the slightest idea what suziewoozie and some others are referring to, I cannot see much to disagree with, however if it is a “thread about a thread” GNHQ will no doubt put their and to one side and act accordingly.

Case of the kettle looking for support? ?

Doodle the fact that april got wrong was not open to interpretation or an alternative theory. And when I check facts, I triangulate . Along with some other posters, I understand the difference quite clearly - it’s a pity some others don’t

'Opinion' is not the same as facts. If someone's 'opinion' is based on erroneous 'facts' - then it is appropriate to challenge.

This is very true; but it is often also true that what constitutes a fact is open to debate. There are those who would argue that Evolution is not a fact, because they believe in Creationism. Most would disagree, but those on differing sides of the argument would draw on different sources to back them up.

The current mistrust of experts has a lot to answer for, IMO. Some opinions are worth more than others.

Also, access to Google (other search engines are available!) means that people often think 'case proven' when they find something to back them up. 'It says here that . . .' doesn't (or shouldn't) settle an argument, but is is so often used to do so.

The analogy with going up to a stranger in the street is totally fallacious

I wonder how much of this would be said if we were all sitting round the table together.