 | | Re: Rules
|
|
(...) Yes. Why don't you and Larry both agree to not post to this newsgroup for at least two weeks? Further, perhaps you could both agree to post only the most agreeable posts elsewhere, and not to respond to each other's posts for at least two (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 14 posts by Scott just now
|
|
(...) You summed it up - shun him. Don't read his messages. There is a person here that I won't read because of his penchant for offensive messages to those he disagrees with. I ignore him. I won't respond to him. If someone's opinion isn't worth (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 14 posts by Scott just now
|
|
(...) Scott, I think you have a problem with your newsreader. There are indeed 14 posts from right about the same time (roughly 2 hours ago). In fact, this post too is "doubled." A lot of the others are cloned posts too. (...) I'm not sure that's (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.
|
|
(...) From WildNet Africa - The Virtual Rhino Park (URL) the dominant male scent marks the territory, spraying his urine along boundaries and paths, and scattering his dung after defecating at middens. Subordinate males bellow and shriek loudly when (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Rules
|
|
Hmm. Perhaps it is time we introduced formal .debate rules. Or maybe even just guidelines. Has anyone any thoughts on whether or not this would work? I was sure this had been proposed before, but I could not find anything when I looked. Any (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 14 posts by Scott just now
|
|
(...) perhaps it's time for both of you to take it offline? It seems that no one else has any interest in your argument anymore, and it does raise the SNR way high... I don't think this community wants to act as judges between you two (considering (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 14 posts by Scott just now
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: The subject line is misleading. The messages were posted over the last two days - check the dates. They were authorised today. (...) Get the hint. (...) There are two ways: 1) Stop spewing out your (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Is Larry a liar?
|
|
Lets take a look at this. My words. (...) Here are your words from a post in .au: ==+== Go ahead. Take it apart. Keep it out of .trains though, please, so maybe Michael can get his question answered. ==+== In your goading, you say "Keep it out of (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 14 posts by Scott just now
|
|
and 13 were repetition of the same tired swill. At least *one* was something other than "what, no answer?" repeated ad nauseum. 7% value add is low value add. Ban him. Shun him. Send him emails and tell him to shut up. But this HAS to stop. How much (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.
|
|
(...) ie. None. (...) Do you really think that is what I meant? You are a bigger fool than I thought. Much bigger. As I have said before, I think the LP is disproportionately white. I think it is overwhelming white. As I have asked before, do you (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What, no answer? (Put three libertarians together in a room...)
|
|
(...) What, no answer? (...) What, no answer? (...) What, no answer? (...) What, no answer? (...) What, no answer? Scott A (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) Chris, 1. I think "bogus" is rather strong. 2. We do not know that that stat is duff(?) 3. Even if it is, we need to find where the error is from. Until then, I shall continue to view Larry's view as nothing more than convenient: ==+== I have (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What, no answer? (was a LP span thread)
|
|
(...) What, no answer? Scott A (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What, no answer? (Re: On the veracity of statistics in general)
|
|
(...) What, no answer? (...) What, no answer? Scott A (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | What, no answer? (was Re: On the veracity of statistics in general)
|
|
(...) What, no answer? Scott A (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) *Nope*, you said this: ==+== I have no faith in statistics that are originated by the UN unless independently corroborated, and that's a blanket statement. The UN apparatus is highly politicised and tends to produce answers that are (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.
|
|
(...) Or it could mean that it is an organisation which fronted by a "white" guy. You are squirming, and you know it. (...) Did you not say "I count noses"? (...) I think we all have "something to worry about". ;) (...) What should I do then? Start (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Larry's behaviour
|
|
(...) I have "won". The moment Larry called me a liar without basis I "won". (...) I would have thought that was clear. (...) See: (URL)If your opinion is really a worthwhile one, then (...) I do not hate anyone (honest). I do not want anyone to (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: train track prservation
|
|
(...) ...and were readers supposed to know that? Were readers supposed to check Michael's every post? Why not mention it in your post? (...) Well, that's nothing to brag about. (...) This is not about your track. (...) Interesting. I can see a salty (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rooting out nests of snakes and destroying them
|
|
(...) Is this what you think justice means? Scott A (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: - The Osama Bin Ladin Song - VERY FUNNY!!!! ; )P
|
|
One does not have to be "anti-war" or a "Taliban supporter" to find it offensive. Indeed, if I were anti-war I'm sure the way events are depicted on the page would confirm my views. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What, no answer? (Re: On the veracity of statistics in general)
|
|
(...) What, no answer? Scott A (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.
|
|
(...) No. Had Scott said "the LP is disproportionately skewed demographically to males and caucasians" that would be one thing. It's even something I've said myself in the past, along with other observations about makeup. But to say it is a "White (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Larry's behaviour
|
|
(...) Ban one of us. Do the poll I suggested. I have my preference as to which, but would support a democratic outcome either way. I have my honor, too, so would abide without a need for administrative intervention to enforce it. And then, once that (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Larry's behaviour
|
|
(...) That's not what I asked. I *KNOW* you think he should apoligaise. I *KNOW* why *YOU'RE* doing it. You're way too proud to bother giving it up. You're addicted to the idea that you'll win. But that's not what I asked. I asked why is it better (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Larry?
|
|
(...) our civil law enforcement system, even if we are certain that they have violated the rights of thousands of innocent civilians, until they have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be guilty. These are merely suspects. If the (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Larry?
|
|
I figure Larry will have something to say about this, but it's interesting reguardless: (URL) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: train track prservation
|
|
(...) That's an issue with your reading comprehension, not the message. (...) When someone catches you in a lie, pointing it out is "bickering", apparently. That's another lie. This "bickering" characterisation is the same lie you used to try to (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Lets not bring athrax etc into this :) (...) This is an interesting point. It is a generaisation, but in the UK low income families tend to have more kids than higher earners. Many couples (married or otherwsie) decide to have only one or no (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Larry's behaviour
|
|
(...) Maybe because I think what he has done is wrong? Maybe I think that by not sorting the situation that is worse? Maybe I think he should apoligaise? Maybe he will? Who knows? Who cares? Scott A (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Truth at Last!!! (re: The Larry P. /Scott A. Show)
|
|
Richard, Have you been cashing cheques in my name too? Scott A (The real one) (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Actually, I think the "mechanism" of eveolution is more to do with small genetic changes that may not show any external effect for many generations. And though we've started looking into such things, we're nowhere near being able to "shut them (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) "in part stopped evolving". I don't get the meaning of that. Humanity is either evolving or not - and I disagree that we've made any significant differences in these areas. Oh, maybe a little in the western world... (...) Nah, just more so (...) (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Truth at Last!!! (re: The Larry P. /Scott A. Show)
|
|
(...) TROLL! TROLL! TROLL! 8?) Matt (23 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The Truth at Last!!! (re: The Larry P. /Scott A. Show)
|
|
Hey Y'all: I know it was wrong to do, and I feel really bad about it (HONESTLY!), but Larry P. and Scott A. are just fake personas I have occasionally been assuming to amuse myself online here in off-topic.debate. By a devilishly intricate means of (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Larry's behaviour
|
|
(...) Ok, here's what I don't get. Better to what end? What happens when everyone comes to that conclusion? Do you get a prize? Does Larry get to no longer debate? Does the name calling stop? Why is it so phenomenally important that each of you (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | One day my name will be in lights!
|
|
(...) This is what Larry does not get. I could be wrong by calling the LP a WMC (by his interpretation of the meaning of WMC). The way to solve that is show why I am wrong. To say I am a liar, Larry would 1st have to show (by his interpretation of (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I can't stand not to see my name in lights (was: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.)
|
|
(...) Thanks for that Larry. I disagree with you. Chris disagrees with you. Perhaps you can now apologise and this will draw to a close? Scott A (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.
|
|
(...) "the LP is a White Man's Club" was caricature which is now being taken out of context. I know that. Larry knows that. When I used the phrase I was questioned on the race issue. I was able to rapidly find two instances where the LP’s view on (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Larry's behaviour
|
|
(...) The more people that come to that conclusion the better as far as I am concerned. (...) I'm doing it in the rather vain hope that he will sort the mess out. I like to think that if I were in his shoes I would have sorted it either way. Scott (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) I'm not quite sure I agree that those are the reasons we've put evolution on pause. After all, if a species is able to overcome certain challenges (disease, famine, etc), aren't they *not* selection factors? The birth defect thing and genetic (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.
|
|
(...) Oops. I take back what I just wrote. (...) But Larry, you know it won't. (...) I disagree. (I also disagree with Scott's assertion about the LP.) An organization coule be essentially a "white man's club" and still have a token black lady as a (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I can't stand not to see my name in lights (was: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.)
|
|
(...) Sorry for undercutting your well crafted (and ultimately correct) argument by answering, just now. ++Lar (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I can't stand not to see my name in lights (was: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.)
|
|
(...) Maybe I should have said get a clue, but that seemed rude. He has hinted to you (by his silence) (end even directly stated it, for that matter) that he isn't going to be baited into further justifying his assertion that you're a liar. (...) (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.
|
|
(...) *sigh* Still no reading comprehension. You got all the apology you're going to get. However, if it will make you shut up, here's an example of a lie: "the LP is a White Man's Club" If you had retracted that statement after it was shown to be (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Too early to tell for sure but we as a species have in part stopped evolving because we have shut down most of the selection factors (disease, famine, the birth defect effect on reproduction) As for the survival of the race, we have to get (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I can't stand not to see my name in lights (was: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.)
|
|
(...) hint (INDIRECT STATEMENT) noun [C] a statement or action which expresses indirectly what a person thinks or wants and which allows another person to take no notice of it without causing offence So what is being hinted at? Is he hinting he (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | I can't stand not to see my name in lights (was: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.)
|
|
(...) Take the hint. Chris (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Oddball thoughts (was: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?)
|
|
(...) horror (...) Humanity will blossom into many other things that will spread across the universe. It doesn't particularly matter if humanity as we see it now continues. I don't think that bombing Japan enabled the continuation of humanity (at (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.
|
|
(...) *Sigh* Still no answer. Scott A (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Tangents (was: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?)
|
|
(...) morality (...) Lets take it back to another example (and no, it's not an analogy). If an escaped murderer breaks into my house, ties up my family and threatens to kill them, but I manage to evade him & get to where my gun is. What should I do? (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Me either! Wow, cool--LUGNET is the apex of evolution! :D (...) *HAHAHA* "Chimpity?" I love it! Oh, yeah, forgot the little ™ (Alt+0665 to make the spiffy extended-char trademark symbol) But, as a matter of point, evolution didn't turn chimps (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) technique (...) When? No-one told me... (...) I don't totally agree. Evolution turned chimps into humans. We definitely don't consider them "humanity" though they may well consider us "chimpity"(tm). At some point, humans will likely evolve (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: - The Osama Bin Ladin Song - VERY FUNNY!!!! ; )P
|
|
(...) We don't want to fight, But by Jingo if we do, We've got the ships, We've got the men, And got the money too. We've fought the Bear before, And while we're Britons true, The Russians [pr.:"Rooshins"] shall not have Constantinople. -G. W. Hall (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
|
(...) Er, yes, there is. Read Dave's statement, to which you replied "Yes," again. You say, thus, that they *are* morally equivalent. The term isn't the problem (it hasn't been for most of the .debaters), it's the semantic baggage that goes with a (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Oddball thoughts (was: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?)
|
|
(...) How do you figure? In part it depends on your definition of "we". Humanity has "stopped evolution" recently, and is poised to "take control of evolution" with genetic engineering of ourselves. I say "we" are what we make ourselves into, but (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Oddball thoughts (was: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?)
|
|
(...) Nah, just an oddball thought. People seemed to be considering "what if"s, and that was my oddball "what if" taken to extremes 8?) (...) We'd have to come up with some sort of practical interstellar travel technique first - the solar system's (...) (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Oddball thoughts (was: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?)
|
|
(...) Was that a serious question? What are the alternative values to weigh against? I see humanity as good for millions of years, actually. We may actually last all the way to the heat death of the universe, we're pretty clever. (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Oddball thoughts (was: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?)
|
|
(...) Here's another oddball thought: It's likely humanity will eventually cease to exist at some time in the future, anyway, so was it worth imparting such horror on the Japanese population, just to keep humanity going a bit longer? ROSCO (23 years ago, 22-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) As an aside, I don't think I actually said that. I think they're all SUSPECT but some of them may well be correct. Especially the ones that have better data collection behind them. The statistic that started this strikes me as being VERY hard (...) (23 years ago, 21-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...
|
|
(...) True, true. Which is why some people say "democracy is the worst system of government ever invented, except for all the rest", or words to that effect. Me, I think there are even LESS good unfettered democracies than there are good dictators. (23 years ago, 21-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
|
(...) Well, that's easy to say at this remove but second guessing is easy. I drew different conclusions from the same data. (...) Again, I drew totally different conclusions from the same data. (23 years ago, 21-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...
|
|
(...) But there are so few good dictators ... :wq Horst (23 years ago, 21-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Hiroshima-Was It Necessary?
|
|
(...) I still hold that one bomb would have been enough. And maybe, since the US weren't ready to drop the bombs sooner, dropping them became unnecessary by the time it became possible. There is some indication for that, to say the least. :wq Horst (23 years ago, 21-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pop-Up Stopper (was: Re: Photos of my MOCs)
|
|
(...) I tried it, it seems to work well for me. Ironically, the outfit seems to be quite active in privacy issues and has some good resources for research into the topic if one is so inclined. (23 years ago, 21-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | - The Osama Bin Ladin Song - VERY FUNNY!!!! ; )P
|
|
**WARNING** DON'T PLAY THIS WHERE ANTI-WAR or TALIBAN SUPPORTERS CAN HEAR IT!!! You need speakers for this... ...and if you don't have them, go out and buy them! (URL) a good one!!! ; )P Darth Joules (23 years ago, 21-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | deep frying chocolate (was Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment))
|
|
(...) How would one go about making one of these? This may be more fun than the chocolate covered tofu strips... ;) -chris (23 years ago, 20-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) Well, it seems obvious to me that if they have produced one study that is bogus, that all their work is suspect. Chris (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
(...) Yes. If a large chunk (say, 50%) of the US population used handguns and rifles to overthrow the national government for the sake of instilling a better one, I'm sure that we would defeat the military. They would not posess the will to put the (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) Both may be wrong: (URL) wait a second. The UN says there are only 70 million landmines: (URL) you check the ICBL site you will see that the measure the size of the mined areas - not the amount of mines in them. Perhaps you can do better (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) Hmm. The word “impartial” does *not* come to mind. Is this the best you can do? Even if you are correct. You have produced a report which suggests that one statistic may be wrong. Your argument alleges that the UN systematically produces duff (...) (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 can remeber the pictures. It was bad. (...) From: (URL) is substantial recent evidence that the natural hormone 17ß-oestradiol has to be considered as a complete carcinogen, concluded the independent scientists. It exerts both tumour (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
(...) It was, but sight of that point was lost and unconstitutional restrictions imposed on what sorts of arms can be owned have now made it less realistic. That's the whole POINT of this debate, after all. (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
(...) Not a single word of arms there. What do you read between the lines? (...) Maybe, but even with the arms you US civilians do have, do you think that is realistic? :wq Horst (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
(...) Can you bring up any examples that have straight relationship to the topic? The problem with your apples is they lie so close together that if one of them is rotten it can too easily infect the others. However, that does not say that the (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) You are naughty Chris. (...) I think you are almost in the black now. Did GB not hand over $400,000,000 tax dollars a couple of weeks ago? (I could be wrong) (...) I hear what you are saying. I think that if it was used fully, it would work (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) I have not read it yet. You said you found it yesterday. What was your basis before then? When you said (04.10.01): "I have no faith in statistics that are originated by the UN unless independently corroborated, and that's a blanket (...) (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)
|
|
(...) That sounds pretty extreme, and like the incautious use of Thalidimide, something to be avoided. On the other hand it doesn't suggest anything about current levels of hormone injection. To tie two threads together, Flouride is a deadly poison. (...) (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)
|
|
(...) For those who are interested: The Demise of Democracy? (URL) 1980, Europeans were horrified to discover that 2 and 3 year old children were reaching puberty. They traced the problem to growth hormones injected into animals. By the mid 1980s (...) (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)
|
|
(...) Help is at hand for you Chris. There is a rather good vegetarian alternative. (...) Well as long as they make enough to be able to buy organic beef for there own kids, then at least a few people should be safe. Scott A (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) They could just be multiplying by two and it would fit that critereon. (...) I'm not sure of that...we're rather busy with our own pet projects. (...) Sort of...we don't pay our dues. (...) Just for the record, I'm one of the paranoids who is (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) I did. Go to the top of the thread and *read* the article I cited. UN stats for landmines are an order of magnitude different than the numbers that a professional in the field of mine clearing (and who therefore would presumably want lots of (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) "of course that cite just shows production capability" You are squirming. The "who knows" does not question the data, only Iraq's culpability. At least that is how it reads to me. (...) Can you justify why you thought this? BTW : I accept no (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) Yawn. Sling mud. Avoid the issues. I almost envy you. Were you spoiled as a child? (...) I did not say that. (...) Really? (...) I don't think you do it right either. You are often not willing to justify your opinion. Take a look at Daves (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
|
(...) Did I say that? (...) Did I say that? You are putting words in my mouth again! My point was that the fact that they are not just accepting raw data from the countries mentioned, but are processing the data in some way, suggests to me there is (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "humility"
|
|
(...) I have no real idea about that, but I have a feeling their system of government is based on the Danish system. Perhaps I'm thinking of Greenland? (...) We almost had a war with Iceland - the cod war. Yes, it was all about fish: (URL)And no one (...) (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...
|
|
(...) Good dictators are fine - it is their inheritors I worry about. :/ Scott 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)
|
|
(...) You could seek psychiatric help for that. (The haggis I mean.) In my strange little sense of right and wrong, no amount of goodness makes it OK, so I just don't even think about it and concentrate on plant-based nutrition. (...) Sure, but (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
