Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

Dookiestix wrote:

Setanta wrote:
As i've already pointed out, Brandon suspends his faculty of disbelief on political topics. He has demonstrated time and again in scientific topics that he is well educated and knowledgeable. I don't intend to join your snide attempt to smear him because you disagree with him politically.

Brandon's offer of this "scientific statistic" is for the sole purpose of politically influencing other's opinions regarding the war in Iraq. Nobody is questioning the numbers here, only the motives and the reasoning behind them.

You seem to be out of the loop entirely on this one. I at no time referred to "scientific statistic"--whatever you contend that to mean. Rather, i pointed out that Brandon, despite his undeniable knowledge of science, suspends disbelief when the topic is politics. DrewDad decided to jump in to make insulting personal remarks about Brandon, who is no buddy of mine, but whose displayed knowledge on scientific topics i happen to respect. So i don't intend to join in with, or remain silent when DD is involved in mere slander without relevance to the topic.

It's nice to know, though, that you're ready to jump in to comment without apparently appreciating the sequence of posts that have lead us this far.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

He is employed in a scientific field, as he has stated, and i have no reason to assume that he is lying, especially in light of his posts on scientific topics--a subject, by the way, in which i have never seen you distinguish yourself. You might criticize the content of his posts, or just make personal sneers at him--please appreciate the difference, smart mouth.

Oh, dear. Setanta's down in the mouth today.

0 Replies

Not at all, DD, i just find your behavior disgusting, and don't intend to remain silent about it.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
Setanta wrote:
As i've already pointed out, Brandon suspends his faculty of disbelief on political topics. He has demonstrated time and again in scientific topics that he is well educated and knowledgeable. I don't intend to join your snide attempt to smear him because you disagree with him politically.

That makes him educated, not a scientist. Please appreciate the difference.

Probably, according to you, my degrees in Physics and work experience in the field don't make me one either.

Then apply your critical thinking skills to the article you posted.

My point is that I doubt you would not allow such sloppy methodology to convince you of anything in your professional life.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Not at all, DD, i just find your behavior disgusting, and don't intend to remain silent about it.

Criticize away. Perhaps you should report my post, if you find it offensive to your sensibilities.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

It's just that you can't do it by posting fudged numbers, then sniping at the people pointing out they were fudged. I am confident that one day, Brandon will learn that making a mistake and not admitting it is only hurting yourself twice.

I hope this will be the case.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Setanta wrote:
As i've already pointed out, Brandon suspends his faculty of disbelief on political topics. He has demonstrated time and again in scientific topics that he is well educated and knowledgeable. I don't intend to join your snide attempt to smear him because you disagree with him politically.

That makes him educated, not a scientist. Please appreciate the difference.

Probably, according to you, my degrees in Physics and work experience in the field don't make me one either.

Then apply your critical thinking skills to the article you posted.

My point is that I doubt you would not allow such sloppy methodology to convince you of anything in your professional life.

My apologies for the sloppy editing. I was torn between "I doubt you would" and "I hope you would not."

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Dookiestix wrote:
Setanta wrote:
As i've already pointed out, Brandon suspends his faculty of disbelief on political topics. He has demonstrated time and again in scientific topics that he is well educated and knowledgeable. I don't intend to join your snide attempt to smear him because you disagree with him politically.

Brandon's offer of this "scientific statistic" is for the sole purpose of politically influencing other's opinions regarding the war in Iraq. Nobody is questioning the numbers here, only the motives and the reasoning behind them.

You seem to be out of the loop entirely on this one. I at no time referred to "scientific statistic"--whatever you contend that to mean. Rather, i pointed out that Brandon, despite his undeniable knowledge of science, suspends disbelief when the topic is politics. DrewDad decided to jump in to make insulting personal remarks about Brandon, who is no buddy of mine, but whose displayed knowledge on scientific topics i happen to respect. So i don't intend to join in with, or remain silent when DD is involved in mere slander without relevance to the topic.

It's nice to know, though, that you're ready to jump in to comment without apparently appreciating the sequence of posts that have lead us this far.

Brandon's degrees have nothing to do with another blatant attempt to use this line of debate that I've heard numerous times already over the years, and seems to have less and less of an effect in defending this war.

To me, it's really quite simple. It is a disengenuous debate. This thread isn't about ones scientific knowledge whatsoever. That would be meandering way off topic.

Numbers are one thing; apples and oranges are quite another...

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
littlek wrote:

Amazing that I do not succumb to the trenchant logic of littlek's airtight disproof of my thesis.

Not so amazing that you choose to respond to littlek's rollingeye smiley and blueflame's Iraq story, but not to any of the posts that actually doublechecked the numbers you quote and found them false - Cyclo's, JustanObserver's, Parados's.

This bears repeating. Brandon posted an article that is based on false and misleading information. That bullsh*t argument was promptly shot down with credible information, and what's the best he can follow up with? That somehow, the mere ability to compare the information makes his argument more valid (or should I say..."less false").

He then follows it up by grasping at straws in saying that it downplays the "Liberal" perception that "bodies are flying all over the place every five minutes," and then follows that with a completely random article about four deaths in D.C., as though that somehow supports his argument.

Seriously Brandon, you make this too easy for us sometimes.

The "Liberal" (translation: realistic) perception is that Iraq is far from a safe country, long after our supposed "victory." Civilians are dying violent deaths daily. That's the point. No one ever said bodies were flying "every five minutes" (seriously, how old are you?).

I'm sure reporters would love to do pieces on another school opening in Iraq, but they can't, because it's still too damn dangerous (look at the CBS reporter in critical condition and her two assistants killed by a car bomb just the other day).

And that posting of the people killed in D.C. the other day reeked of desperation. It's clear you know you're losing the argument when you resort to that. What's that? People were killed in a major metropolitan city? No sh*t.

Brandon is the PERFECT example of cognitive dissonance. As stated by another person here, it's clear that he is educated in some form or another. Unfortunately, his unequivocal love of Bush makes him go to extraordinary measures to not recognize any arguments made against the man or his administration.

We've seen it in many threads already. Whenever presented with information disproving his assertions, he will either make up a strawman to argue about and redirect the thread, or he will simply not recognize it.

I don't know if its more sad that he goes to such extreme lengths to support ANYTHING Bush does, or that he doesn't seem to realize that he's doing it. I feel bad for the guy.

0 Replies

I think I'm going to ask to have this thread moved to Science and Mathematics where Brandon's initial post will get the drubbing it truly deserves.

I don't think (hope?) he'd have tried to pass the foolishness off there.

0 Replies

Dookiestix wrote:

Setanta wrote:
Dookiestix wrote:
Setanta wrote:
As i've already pointed out, Brandon suspends his faculty of disbelief on political topics. He has demonstrated time and again in scientific topics that he is well educated and knowledgeable. I don't intend to join your snide attempt to smear him because you disagree with him politically.

Brandon's offer of this "scientific statistic" is for the sole purpose of politically influencing other's opinions regarding the war in Iraq. Nobody is questioning the numbers here, only the motives and the reasoning behind them.

You seem to be out of the loop entirely on this one. I at no time referred to "scientific statistic"--whatever you contend that to mean. Rather, i pointed out that Brandon, despite his undeniable knowledge of science, suspends disbelief when the topic is politics. DrewDad decided to jump in to make insulting personal remarks about Brandon, who is no buddy of mine, but whose displayed knowledge on scientific topics i happen to respect. So i don't intend to join in with, or remain silent when DD is involved in mere slander without relevance to the topic.

It's nice to know, though, that you're ready to jump in to comment without apparently appreciating the sequence of posts that have lead us this far.

Brandon's degrees have nothing to do with another blatant attempt to use this line of debate that I've heard numerous times already over the years, and seems to have less and less of an effect in defending this war.

To me, it's really quite simple. It is a disengenuous debate. This thread isn't about ones scientific knowledge whatsoever. That would be meandering way off topic.[/size]

Numbers are one thing; apples and oranges are quite another... (emphasis added)

You should address that criticism to the member who began taking swipes at Brandon by making snide comments about his scientific credentials. If you had been paying attention, something you apparently continue not to do, you'd know that i was not the one who started this disgusting display of puerile temper.

0 Replies

Set, to steal your line, your opinion of me and/or my behavior is a subject of massive indifference to me.

As, I'm sure, is my opinion of Brandon to him.

0 Replies

And i assure you that your opinions are a matter of indifference to me. Slandering people not only without cause, but falsely, is disgusting to me--and i will say as much, without regard to your opinion of the matter.

0 Replies

Hey, get a room you two! Laughing

0 Replies

My apologies, Set, if my behavior does not match your expectations of the high quality of discourse on Internet discussion boards. Rolling Eyes

Your determination to comment upon my choice of words, while entertaining, is also peculiar.

Please allow me to assure you, however, that you are neither my parent, nor my editor.

0 Replies

Nor your friend . . .

Allow me to assure you that on any subequent occasion when i remark on someone's undoubted area of expertise, and you sink into idiotic insults on that topic, i will repond then as i have now.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Nor your friend . . .

Allow me to assure you that on any subequent occasion when i remark on someone's undoubted area of expertise, and you sink into idiotic insults on that topic, i will repond then as i have now.

Lest of course one's area of expertise has absolutely nothing to do with the original intent of the thread.

If this was purely about statistics, then this should be moved to another category.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Nor your friend . . .

Allow me to assure you that on any subequent occasion when i remark on someone's undoubted area of expertise, and you sink into idiotic insults on that topic, i will repond then as i have now.

You have more faith in Brandon than I do, that's for certain.

How someone can claim to be a scientist, and yet regurgitate tripe such as the article that started this thread, is beyond me.

Your perseveration on this is baffling. Why this childish insistence on having the last word?

0 Replies

"Lest of course"? What the hell is that supposed to mean?

DD made a snide comment about Brandon lacking a knowledge of science, asserting that if he did, he'd not fall for such a transparently false statistical claim. I responded, without heat, simply to the effect that Brandon's scientific knowledge is undoubted, but that he suspends his faculty of disbelief when the topic is politics. DD then proceeded to a series of remarks to the effect that Brandon must have not scientific knowledge. I responded to that as the needless slander that it was.

So you decide to stick your nose in, and demonstrate that you have completely failed to understand the series of remarks which were exchanged. Who the f*ck appointed you hall monitor? Who are you to determine what is or is not appropriate to this discussion. You seem to think it is OK to slander Brandon on the basis of his relative scientific knowledge, but not OK to object to that slander. I entertain as low an opinion of your contribution to these exchanges as i do of DD's.

0 Replies

Dookiestix,

Contrary to your statement, I am challenging the numbers and the methodology of the argument. It didn't even take me 5 minutes to figure out how bogus the argument was. I understand that Brandon is advancing the Party line like a good soldier, but it's the intellectual laziness that gets me, not the partisanship; aren't we all used to that by now?

DD

Quote:

How someone can claim to be a scientist, and yet regurgitate tripe such as the article that started this thread, is beyond me.

There are good and bad scientists, just like any other profession. It is entirely possible that Brandon is a wonderful physicst, yet not so good at the social or statistical sciences, as well. Or he could be doing it on purpose to rile up the libs and distract from other conversations. There are many possible reasons that have nothing to do with his ability as a scientist in his chosen field.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know