Butters

I like your attempt to use logic and reasoning. (My kind of person!) I used to attempt to use logic and reasoning with the help of statistics, risk analysis, risk management, and gear. However, I am constantly told I am crazy because I currently motorcycle, rock climb, and sky dive. I have come to the conclusion that these people think we are crazy to justify what they are doing (or not doing) and will do so independent of logic and reasoning. So have fun and act crazy! You don't have to tell me that sky diving is crazy. You should tell my other personality though. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I used to play Russian roulette but then they took away my gun. Do you want me to pack for you? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

That's a tough one to pick. Who is a "terrorist"? Radical Islamists? Christian Crusaders? Israeli settlers? Palestinians? Founding fathers of the US? US nation builders? Cecil Rhodes? French Revolutionaries? Native Americans?....that's the short list to choose from. Terrorist: A person who uses the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

How can you believe that you are no better than a terrorist, child molester, etc...? If everyone in the world like you was replaced with a terrorist, child molester, etc..., would the world become a better or worse place? I'm betting worse. When we live in a perfect world we can make perfect decision, until then... "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797) "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." George Orwell (1903 - 1950) I would pick terrorists because child molestors and people who batter women are terrorists (a person who uses the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion) and would be included. It would only be a temporary solution but it would create a situation in which it would be easier to create a permanent solution. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Earth always chooses rock, so you should always choose paper. If you get in a battle with the paper, then switch to scissors to win. Be sure to allow plenty of time to win that battle so you can switch back to paper and defeat earth's rock. The joke is that skydivers are so dumb that we first chose scissors even though the earth always chooses rock and then cheat over to paper to win. "I've played chicken with the ground two times and both times the ground has won. I'm not to worried though, it's a best of five series and I know I can make a comeback." "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

You have two options and neither of them will change the whuffo's mind. Option 1] Avoid the situation. Option 2] Have fun with the situation. I like to have fun with the situation. Say things like, "I do have a death wish, but I never get what I wish for.", "Skydiving is like playing rock, paper, scissors. I jump out and choose scissors, look down and see rock, quickly switch to paper, and I win. I hope I never forget to switch.", or "Two out of three voices in my head agree with you. It might be unanimous but I don't speak Spanish.". "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Someone once told me I was crazy. So I saw a psychologist. The psychologist told me I was crazy. So I went to an insane aslyum. The insane aslyum told me I was crazy. So I escaped and came here. Nice to meet you!

Wait, not everyone is using their real name? Ok, ok, I'll tell everyone my real name. My real name is Christophe Delorean. Now you know. Now you know my little secret. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Children should learn about the history of the whole before the history of a part. Does it matter that a student knows about the history of homosexuals (or white, black, men, women, etc...) in America if they don't know about the history of America? I hear the constant complaint that Americans are falling behind in education. Are the countries that are springing ahead having these months? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Yes, you made an error. And this isn't social policy, it's foreign policy. And even at the lower level of the interval, it's still way more than the "official" figures. You can change previous statements from social to foreign. I agree that the lower level of the interval is way more than the "official" figures. However, this does not make either of the figures correct. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

First, I made an error in an earlier statement. The "Percent of Houses Surveyed in Iraq: 0.00047" should be changed to "Percent of Houses Surveyed in Iraq: 0.047". Second, the sample size does contribute to the margin of error. Third, I agree that there are other factors that contribute to the margin of error. However, factors compound each other causing small factors to play a role in the margin of error. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I understand sampling theory. For a statistic used to affect social policy I do not believe the sample size was appropriate and I do not believe the way in which the sample was obtained accurately represented the whole population. In this situation the survey should be repeated to properly gauge outliers and other errors attributed to the sample size, the sample representing the whole population, and other factors. PS: Whether you agree with the statistics or not does not mean you are for or against the war. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Hence the quoted errors. It seems to me that the grain of salt you mention is already incorporated in the result. 95% CI 392,979 - 942,636 From a statistics point of view, that is large. That combined with the previous post and other factors stated in the article, the results should still be taken with a grain of salt. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

OK, as for that comparison I think it is done in a much more elegant fashion by Kevin Barrett Now, turning back to the topic at hand, it seems to me that they have actually gone to great lengths to give statistically sound estimates in this work. Agreed, there may be systematic errors biasing the result but I have yet to see someone arguing what these errors might be and in what direction they might pull the estimate. This all reminds me of the Florida recounts where every democrat thought that all recounts would automatically be in Gore's favour. You may not like to hear it, but this is the way to estimate the death toll as a result of the conflict given that all other parameters had remained approximately at status quo in the event that the invasion had not taken place. Going through the numbers I would say that I was mostly surprised over the number of violent deaths. I had expected an excess mortality to arise primarily from a lowered standard of living: Less food,less medical care. The number of violent deaths is a very tangible thing. One might view this number as a "prediction" of what would be found should a larger study be conducted. Indeed from a scientific point of view this is how I would see it, had it merely been an academic point of contention. Sadly, it is not which is probably the reason that it has not just been presented a "quadrupling of the baseline mortality rate since whatever date". The survey consisted of 47 randomly selected clusters with 40 households from each cluster (1849 houses total). The estimated mortality was 654,965 (95% CI 392,979-942,636) Population of Iraq: 27,139,584 Average Residents Per House: 6.9 Population of Iraq / Average Residents Per House Houses in Iraq: 3,933,273 Houses in Irag / Houses Surveyed Percent of Houses Surveyed in Iraq: 0.00047 From a statistics point of view, that is small. Combined with other factors stated in the article, the results should be taken with a grain of salt. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

According to who? Language is constantly evolving, and there are no prescriptive governing bodies, only descriptive. Which dictionary? Apparently not the same one StreetScooby is using. Merriam-Webster Dictionary. The English language is constantly evolving. However, without agreeing on common defintions we have no base in which to make other definitions or description. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

There are ample examples in the English language of the addition of an adjective changing the meaning of a noun. Sure, a round parachute is still a parachute, but is a tongue ring still a ring? No, it's a bar. This issue is certainly still debatable, but a grammar argument isn't going to solve it. Actually a tongue ring and a tongue bar are two different things because a bar and a ring are not the same thing. Thus a tongue ring is still a ring and not a bar (people that call a tongue bar a tongue ring are making an incorrect statement). Dictionary Definition: Sexual Intercourse 1] Heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis. 2] Physical sexual contact between individuals that involves the genitalia of at least one person (as anal or oral intercourse) that does not involve penetration of the vagina by the penis. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

The actions are not defined as oral and anal. (Oral and anal refer to parts of the body). The actions are defined as oral sex and anal sex. You can not define the action as oral sex or anal sex and not consider the action sex. Did you have a parachute? No I had a round parachute. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic? If Taiwan declared war against China then America arming Taiwan against China would be similar to when America declared war on England and the French armed America against England. (This was a good action since Britian was oppressing America.) However, Taiwan has not declared war on China and arming at any point Tawain will most likely lead to a world war and not just a civil war. America can not place economic sanctions against China without creating a confrontational situation. However, Americans can boycott Chinese merchandise without creating a confrontational situation. We should get Americans to boycott Chinese merchandise and continue peaceful negotiations between Taiwan and China as a first plan of action. If Taiwan and China move away from peaceful negotiations then arming Taiwan should become a possibility. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

If we are going to enter into this situation in a confrontational manner then we should be prepared for another world war. I am not sure that we or any other nations are prepared for another world war at this time. This is the reason I was asking if you were being serious or sarcastic. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Are you serious or being sarcastic? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Politics is no longer who is going to do what good things but who has done the least bad things. Future political statement: "Yes I was involved in a financial scam and molested young children but my opponent was involved in a financial scam, molested young children, and raised taxes." "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Many, hence the previous statement. How many have you taken? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Our govt IS corrupt and sooner or later we are going to be ganged up upon just as Hitler was. And it's goin to be a sad day for the American citizen. Hopefully we'll do the opposite and unite. Either way. Fuck gold and silver. Stock up on brass and lead Are you being serious? Are you seriously comparing us to Hitler? If so, please move, please move to a third world country. May I suggest moving to Darfur? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I appreciate you giving another source. However, after reading the article it is apparent that the statistics can not be proven to be accurate any more than the other statistics presented by other parties. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Can you name a government that is not corrupt? What are you doing about it? Are you moving, are you running for government, are you ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch