|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 2, 2023 23:52:38 GMT
I fully acknowledge the role that this particular piece of data played. I also acknowledge that it goes SOME WAY to supporting the view that you stated. But the rest of my data indicated that there was a far worse problem and that, in fact the problem that this data highlighted would not get worse with the change in legislation. So 3 bits of data, one of which acknowledged the problem you highlighted, but the other 2 contradicted it. Note - acknowledged, did not put in any context relative to what difference the legislation may make. Now if you respond to this in your usual way, then I will leave you with the last word. The use of the word "significant" is entirely your own opinion I have already explained it to you . Hi Bentley Really really last response unless your leopard changes it's spots. You've maybe explained it to yourself but not to me. That's your goal when you debate. So breaking it down The data you latched on to clearly showed that there is a level of male violence towards women that EXISTING legislation gives them an opportunity to exploit. That is all this data shows. Right? The question is that whether the change in that legislation will exacerbate that level. Right? So the earlier data is no longer relevant. Right? It will only tell you that you have a problem. Not whether it will now get worse. Right? You need more data to answer that. Right? So that extra data would indicate that it won't. Right? So you don't believe the extra data but believe the original. Why? Bear in mind the total source of ALL data was me. The same source for all. You have not produced ANY data whatsoever. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jan 2, 2023 23:55:32 GMT
I have already explained it to you . Hi Bentley Really really last response unless your leopard changes it's spots. You've maybe explained it to yourself but not to me. That's your goal when you debate. So breaking it down The data you latched on to clearly showed that there is a level of male violence towards women that EXISTING legislation gives them an opportunity to exploit. That is all this data shows. Right? The question is that whether the change in that legislation will exacerbate that level. Right? So the earlier data is no longer relevant. Right? It will only tell you that you have a problem. Not whether it will now get worse. Right? You need more data to answer that. Right? So that extra data would indicate that it won't. Right? So you don't believe the extra data but believe the original. Why? Bear in mind the total source of ALL data was me. The same source for all. You have not produced ANY data whatsoever. The problem with debate is that it is not immune to obtuseness and obfuscation. I had all of your research that I needed . I explained ( iirc more than once ). It’s all there if you look . I’m not going down the rabbit hole again . |
|
|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 3, 2023 8:22:06 GMT
Hi Bentley Really really last response unless your leopard changes it's spots. You've maybe explained it to yourself but not to me. That's your goal when you debate. So breaking it down The data you latched on to clearly showed that there is a level of male violence towards women that EXISTING legislation gives them an opportunity to exploit. That is all this data shows. Right? The question is that whether the change in that legislation will exacerbate that level. Right? So the earlier data is no longer relevant. Right? It will only tell you that you have a problem. Not whether it will now get worse. Right? You need more data to answer that. Right? So that extra data would indicate that it won't. Right? So you don't believe the extra data but believe the original. Why? Bear in mind the total source of ALL data was me. The same source for all. You have not produced ANY data whatsoever. The problem with debate is that it is not immune to obtuseness and obfuscation. I had all of your research that I needed . I explained ( iirc more than once ). It’s all there if you look . I’m not going down the rabbit hole again . Hi Bentley I've re read your posts and what I stated above IS what your saying. That you believe the data that shows there is an existing problem but don't believe the data that indicates it won't increase with the new legislation. Right? You don't need to go down any rabbit holes. One word will do. Yes or no. |
|
