DC Tom Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Celibate What? He's gay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 What? He's gay? Sycophant, celibate, gay.... it is all a matter of lifestyle choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Sycophant, celibate, gay....it is all a matter of lifestyle choice. Wheres your wikipedia link to back this statement up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Wheres your wikipedia link to back this statement up? I'm sorry, but you're going to have to provide me a reliable link that demonstrates that links are reliable before I'll accept that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 You can pick up a book and see the relevant math. A better idea would be: show us the math that proves you right. You can't. It doesn't exist. I'm sorry, for a while there I thought you had some actual math in mind that was relevant to the discussion about regression toward the mean. It turns out I was being naive, and that you just like throwing the word "math" around to make yourself seem big and important. As for the test/retest phenomenon (a.k.a. regression toward the mean), I've already provided links from Stanford, the University of Chicago, Duke, and other credible sources which describe the phenomenon. For you to ask for additional proof is absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I simply did what you have been doing. providing a useless link that does nothing to further my cause. No link that i post is going to cure your mathematical, biological, and economical ignorance. The fact that you were too ignorant or stupid to understand the links I provided does not invalidate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I'm sorry, for a while there I thought you had some actual math in mind that was relevant to the discussion about regression toward the mean. It turns out I was being naive, and that you just like throwing the word "math" around to make yourself seem big and important. As for the test/retest phenomenon (a.k.a. regression toward the mean), I've already provided links from Stanford, the University of Chicago, Duke, and other credible sources which describe the phenomenon. For you to ask for additional proof is absurd. You don't even know what math is, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 You don't even know what math is, do you? There you go again throwing dem big wurds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 You don't even know what math is, do you? Here's a definition for math, from dictionary.com Math 1. a science (or group of related sciences) dealing with the logic of quantity and shape and arrangement2. A word Bungee Jumper likes to throw around in ways that imply he's somehow better than everyone else. Does not back claims up with links or strong supporting arguments. Also see error, variance, genotype, phenotype, . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Here's a definition for math, from dictionary.com I don't think I'm better than everyone else. Just you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I don't think I'm better than everyone else. Just you. I can vouch for Bungee Jumper on this one. Sorry I don't have a reputable link to back it up though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I don't think I'm better than everyone else. Just you. As usual, you're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 The fact that you were too ignorant or stupid to understand the links I provided does not invalidate them. The fact that you cannot comprehend them, and interpret them incorrectly doesnt validate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I don't think I'm better than everyone else. Just you. stop with your propaganda! just because HA has a his education from byrant and stratton and some online diploma mills doesnt make his less of a human! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 The fact that you cannot comprehend them, and interpret them incorrectly doesnt validate them. The links in question are valid because their logic is valid. You were too stupid to see the validity of the logic in the Hyperstats and Wikipedia links, so I found links from Stanford, the University of Chicago, Berkeley, etc., which said the same thing. Then, instead of making fun of words like "Hyperstats" or "Wikipedia" you started accusing me of hiding behind big names like Stanford. You claimed to agree with the Stanford and University of Chicago links, while disagreeing with the Berkeley link. That's odd, because all three sources said the same thing, which was also the same thing Hyperstats said, and which I'd been saying from the very beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 What i don't understand is why most of the people who are pissed off that we went to war on lies didn't speak up before we went into Iraq. When the war started I thought it was a bad idea. I tried telling people I know (no, not on a message board that's futile and assinine (hint hint wink wink MG)). Now everyone is against the war they blindly let the elected officials (Republican and Democrat) get us into and want us out Maybe if the American people had put as much thought into going to war as they do about American Idol® we wouldn't be in this mess That said, all this b*tching and moaning about how we got here is irrelevant. Losing sucks (trust me i'm a bills fan) so lets try to win it. And there's the whole you broke it you bought it theory. Well we broke Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted February 17, 2007 Author Share Posted February 17, 2007 WTF happened to this thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted February 17, 2007 Author Share Posted February 17, 2007 What i don't understand is why most of the people who are pissed off that we went to war on lies didn't speak up before we went into Iraq. When the war started I thought it was a bad idea. I tried telling people I know (no, not on a message board that's futile and assinine (hint hint wink wink MG)). Now everyone is against the war they blindly let the elected officials (Republican and Democrat) get us into and want us out Maybe if the American people had put as much thought into going to war as they do about American Idol® we wouldn't be in this mess That said, all this b*tching and moaning about how we got here is irrelevant. Losing sucks (trust me i'm a bills fan) so lets try to win it. And there's the whole you broke it you bought it theory. Well we broke Iraq. I went to Washington and marched against the war. I called my representatives and argued with anyone that would listen that this was an incredibly stupid idea. But Saddam attacked us on 9-11 was the basic sh-- people spewed back at me. How did the 'liberal' news media cover the antiwar movement? 20 fat dudes showed up to protest we 100k that protested the war and they got equal coverage on the bottom of the front page of the newspapers the day after. And yes, I totally agree that the American people should have thought more about this, but Bush did a fantastic job of selling the war. We were all going to die if we didn't invade, Saddam was behind 9-11, Saddam had ties to al-Quida, so blindly we went off to war. And don't talk to me about that stupid iraq resolution, thats another story entirely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Balls Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 What i don't understand is why most of the people who are pissed off that we went to war on lies didn't speak up before we went into Iraq. You're kidding right? Take this forum for example. Back then if anyone took an anti-invasion stance here they were immediately ridiculed, hounded, and in some cases thrown off the site. There was the legendary "USS Abraham Lincoln Mission Accomplished thread" (Goddam I wish that had been pinned) a ludicrous right wing conservative circle jerk love fest for all things Bush. Anyways many of us knew the invasion was a lie. We knew when they ignored all the weapons inspectors and when they started to manufacture their case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 You're kidding right? Take this forum for example. Back then if anyone took an anti-invasion stance here they were immediately ridiculed, hounded, and in some cases thrown off the site. There was the legendary "USS Abraham Lincoln Mission Accomplished thread" (Goddam I wish that had been pinned) a ludicrous right wing conservative circle jerk love fest for all things Bush. Anyways many of us knew the invasion was a lie. We knew when they ignored all the weapons inspectors and when they started to manufacture their case. Gee, I wonder why I didn't get immediately ridiculed or hounded? You know, despite my anti-invasion stance? I wonder if it's because I used actual information and conclusions, rather than terms like "ludicrous right-wing conservative circle jerk love fest" which have little to do with discussion. Those things wouldn't be a problem but for whatever reason, you hardcore partisans don't seem to understand that you have to actually build some subject credibility at THIS site before you can toss such terms around. Nah, instead it's gotta be some kind of conspiracy against all you lefty partisan apologists. Right, RichinOhio? What about you, Kurt Godel? At the end of the day, if you're a troll, you go on vacation. It's pretty much that simple. Tell your buddy Buff65 we sure miss him. You wanna contribute, try actually bringing something to the table. You know, more than "my party kicks ass and yours sucks." The proof, as usual, is in the post. "I sure wish the "Mission Accomplished" thread was pinned". Why? So you could use some more of your typical devices to put words in people's mouths? Or pretend that your wishing for open failure somehow made it happen, because of your intrinsic understanding of "post major operations" military strategy/nation building and how outside forces influence it? I wish it was posted too, because there were a couple of posts in there by yours truly that said "Now the hard part begins", complete with what the negatives will be when the media starts their crap and the politicians start reacting to it. That says nothing of the gems by BiB that put EVERYONE who posts at this site from any side of the debate to absolute shame. But you go ahead and think of your legendary genius here. It exists only in your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts