|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 17, 2022 14:47:58 GMT
Nope. You just don't understand the difference between causation and correlation. Go back to the start of the thread and catch up. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Dec 17, 2022 14:53:06 GMT
No need. I understand perfectly already but you're getting confused.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 17, 2022 14:58:52 GMT
No need. I understand perfectly already but you're getting confused. Fine then you've already seen my answers. I'll stop the one liners with you immediately and await a more detailed post from you. I won't hold my breath. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Dec 17, 2022 15:16:52 GMT
The point's been made. You didn't understand it. Not much I can do about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 17, 2022 15:23:50 GMT
The point's been made. You didn't understand it. Not much I can do about that. Same old. Got its boring. Try and think up something new wont you. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Dec 17, 2022 15:58:12 GMT
Perhaps this will answer the conundrum. Here is the problem in mathematical terms.
It gets a bit more complicated than what most people would understand to be the case.
I don't think anyone has ever claimed it was as simple as Poor=Crime. There are a thousand other influences that can effect the results. But that doesn't change the fact that poverty is a strong influence. I just meant in the narrow sense where you have a statistical correlation and a hypothesis plus a null hypothesis (it does not make any difference) and then you ask what is the chance of the hypothesis being validated by the data. It's a form of inductive reasoning, seeing a result and wondering how likely a thing caused it or not. Put it another way, it is more complicated than a Sun journalist could deal with so we venture into la la land of opinion because this is easier. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 17, 2022 16:10:48 GMT
I don't think anyone has ever claimed it was as simple as Poor=Crime. There are a thousand other influences that can effect the results. But that doesn't change the fact that poverty is a strong influence. I just meant in the narrow sense where you have a statistical correlation and a hypothesis plus a null hypothesis (it does not make any difference) and then you ask what is the chance of the hypothesis being validated by the data. It's a form of inductive reasoning, seeing a result and wondering how likely a thing caused it or not. Put it another way, it is more complicated than a Sun journalist could deal with so we venture into la la land of opinion because this is easier. I do not believe that everything can be answered mathematically. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Dec 17, 2022 16:41:48 GMT
I just meant in the narrow sense where you have a statistical correlation and a hypothesis plus a null hypothesis (it does not make any difference) and then you ask what is the chance of the hypothesis being validated by the data. It's a form of inductive reasoning, seeing a result and wondering how likely a thing caused it or not. Put it another way, it is more complicated than a Sun journalist could deal with so we venture into la la land of opinion because this is easier. I do not believe that everything can be answered mathematically. That's a fairly safe belief you have. There are a lot of things in everything. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Dec 17, 2022 16:59:36 GMT
The point's been made. You didn't understand it. Not much I can do about that. Same old. Got its boring. Try and think up something new wont you.
Zany, Zany, Zany...
You're still struggling with causation/correlation.
In this case it's because you've swallowed the left-wing narrative that poverty causes crime. It's become an article of faith for you and hence isn't amenable to logic, reasoning or indeed evidence.
So I can't reason you out of a position that you weren't reasoned into. You simply aren't capable of that discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 17, 2022 17:10:42 GMT
Same old. Got its boring. Try and think up something new wont you.
Zany, Zany, Zany...
You're still struggling with causation/correlation.
In this case it's because you've swallowed the left-wing narrative that poverty causes crime. It's become an article of faith for you and hence isn't amenable to logic, reasoning or indeed evidence.
So I can't reason you out of a position that you weren't reasoned into. You simply aren't capable of that discussion.
Not interested in your empty posts, save your time. Have you noticed that since you joined the thread two pages ago, everyone else has left? (Except Baron who's talking about something else entirely) |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Dec 17, 2022 17:19:33 GMT
Everyone except for you, Zany.
Because you've bored them all to death.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 17, 2022 17:24:47 GMT
Everyone except for you, Zany. Because you've bored them all to death. Yeah funny how they were all talking to me but left when you started. Just saying. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Dec 17, 2022 17:27:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 17, 2022 17:30:10 GMT
Yep that's the effect you had. Still we had 7 pages of interesting discussion before you arrived with your particular form of sedative. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Dec 17, 2022 20:31:52 GMT
He was right though, wasn't he. Absolutely, he was right. And no one today can say he wasn't. The only thing the great man did not foresee is just how bad it would get in years to come. Even he didn't envisage this madness. |
|
