 | | Re: Liberterian comes through for the Bill of Rights (was a slur
|
|
(...) Go to Iceland. They have that there. According to _Maxim_ (not the worlds most reliable source) anyway. (...) Implied right to privacy makes it unconstitutional for government to require it, I think. (anyway it's required to make the example (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) Well, it doesn't discuss _at all_ the method of collection. Without knowing how data were collected, you can't really judge the rigor. I was just guessing because I don't think the UN has the cash to really do that study right. Other UN (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Put three libertarians together in a room and they won't be able to agree where to go for lunch...
|
|
(...) It is if they're usurping the power instilled by _The People_ in a system to prevent _some people_ from doing wrong. Democracies unfettered by just controls are worse than good dictators. Chris (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Merits of Iceland (was Re: "humility"
|
|
(...) *And* they have some majorly kickin' 4 wheel drives. One of the carmags I read on airplanes had a "one lap around X" article which they do as a regular feature, and the X in this case was Iceland. They hooked up with an outfit called Artic (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Liberterian comes through for the Bill of Rights (was a slur
|
|
(...) Why don't you people trim anything? (...) I didn't see this original note...that's not a bad idea actually! I think we need more nudity. :-) (...) Did you read _Diamond Age_? What about the goombah with the gun in his forehead? (...) How's (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "humility"
|
|
(...) Iceland, if it weren't for the inability to avoid tobacco smoke, would be very near the top of my list. As I understand it, modern Iceland is a derivative of the only real-world example of Privately Produced Law. The have almost no crime. And (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) (UN Population Division, 1998)"), which are not linked to and not presented. How you see this as rigorous is not clear to me. No evidence of the veracity of those statistics is given. No discussion of them is given either. So if you think this (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) If that's what you think I am saying I must not have said it very clearly. All I am trying to say is that the more often a statistic is said, the more likely it is for members of a certain large class of people (1) to accept it as true without (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) The page gives a link to an overview of changes in the "WHO World Standard Population". The depth of overview makes me think that the survey was better than "non-rigorous". But I am open to challenge on that! See it here: (URL) A (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What's the beef? (was Spam Spam Spam etc ) (Was *not* Spam & Chips)
|
|
(...) I wish I had the will power to be a vegetarian. Chicken & fish are just too good. I am occasionally tempted by haggis also. (...) Indeed, there are those who claim that they cause breast cancer and may be causing girls to reach puberty (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) I agree with all of this, but even still tend to accept statistics unless I have a reason to not. I suspect that the UN rarely lies in it's reporting of statistics. I think accidental inaccuracies are more worrisome. In the page Scott recently (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How I learned to stop worrying and love the beef (was: What's the beef?)
|
|
(...) Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face? Dave! (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) Oh, and another thing... nice tangent. Why not actually think about what was written, the way Christopher did, and respond with a reasoned, well thought out reply that shows that you aren't posting first and thinking later. That is a bit (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) I don't see "who knows" as *accepting* anything. (...) No I wasn't, just that I was willing to quote it to shut YOU up because YOU accept those statistics apparently without question. Doesn't mean *I* do. But I think UN statistics on the (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What's the beef? (was Spam Spam Spam etc ) (Was *not* Spam & Chips)
|
|
(...) Gosh...I've eaten beef more recently than that and I'm vegetarian. (...) There's a lot to be said for growth hormones. Chris (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Put three libertarians together in a room and they won't be able to agree where to go for lunch...
|
|
Larry, 5 Points on this 1) A point of integrity : I think the description you give of who was intended to take part in the survey is misleading (I base this on the link you give). 2) A point of integrity : You describe the survey as "totally (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) Indeed. And rather than answer it - Larry deletes it! He needs to get his head out of the sand. Scott A (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Liberterian comes through for the Bill of Rights (was a slur
|
|
(...) "may well" is not "is" (...) So you have no basis for *your* mudslinging??? Have you no shame? (...) Why do we want to stop hijackings? To protect life and commerce? Your proposal will not do the latter. (...) You were taking a principle to (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba is a terrorist state (was Re: Any truth in this one - Cuba as a terrostist state.
|
|
(...) Yep. You last comment is old news in the UK. A few years ago we literally caught a boat load or arms (inc SAMs) from Libya. I think since then, Libya told the UK just what it had supplied to help counter the IRA. See: (URL) the help the IRA (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What, no answer? (Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good)
|
|
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:<GL3oK6.4E4@lugnet.com>... (...) us (...) What, no answer? (...) was (...) the (...) What, no answer? (...) imposed, (...) What, no answer? Scott A (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
