Orton's Arm Posted March 8, 2007 Author Share Posted March 8, 2007 And if I've spent 100 pages arguing with you, it was to show how badly incorrect your views are. I'm not misinterpreting you. I understand you perfectly. You're just incorrect. Again. Still. The fact that you think you understand my views sort of reminds me of a ten year old who thinks he's ready for the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 The fact that you think you understand my views only underscores your own incapacity to participate in this discussion. I have officially slipped through the looking glass... You can't even do algebra. You contradict yourself half the time. You don't even understand YOUR OWN posts. If you did, you'd realize that, were you right, it would negate your own eugenics program, as you'd be breeding for a trait you can't accurately measure. In reality, you're wrong...which negates your eugenics program anyway. But even if somehow the entire mathematical world were warped to match your pitiful misunderstanding of it...you'd still be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 8, 2007 Author Share Posted March 8, 2007 I have officially slipped through the looking glass... You can't even do algebra. You contradict yourself half the time. You don't even understand YOUR OWN posts. If you did, you'd realize that, were you right, it would negate your own eugenics program, as you'd be breeding for a trait you can't accurately measure. In reality, you're wrong...which negates your eugenics program anyway. But even if somehow the entire mathematical world were warped to match your pitiful misunderstanding of it...you'd still be wrong. In your earlier, lengthy post, you made so many errors in describing my own position it wasn't even funny. A person of average intelligence should have been able to avoid that kind of embarrassment after about ten minutes of reading and thought. For you to engage in that basic, fundamental incomprehension after dragging these boards through 60+ unwelcome pages of debate is simply inexcusable. I wrote a long summary of where you went wrong in describing my posts. You didn't bother to read this; apparently because you have no interest in either a) correcting whatever miscommunication may have taken place between us, or b) sparing these boards another 60 - 70 pages of useless debate about questions which statisticians have already firmly settled. And once again you've failed to show even a basic understanding of the implications of Darwinism. Because now you're saying that the only way artificial selection can work is if the desired traits can be measured with little or no error. Do you honestly have this shallow an understanding about how natural and artificial selection work, or are you once again engaging in intellectual dishonesty to try to undermine what you claim to be "Nazi" beliefs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 In your earlier, lengthy post, you made so many errors in describing my own position it wasn't even funny. A person of average intelligence should have been able to avoid that kind of embarrassment after about ten minutes of reading and thought. For you to engage in that basic, fundamental incomprehension after dragging these boards through 60+ unwelcome pages of debate is simply inexcusable. I wrote a long summary of where you went wrong in describing my posts. You didn't bother to read this; apparently because you have no interest in either a) correcting whatever miscommunication may have taken place between us, or b) sparing these boards another 60 - 70 pages of useless debate about questions which statisticians have already firmly settled. And once again you've failed to show even a basic understanding of the implications of Darwinism. Because now you're saying that the only way artificial selection can work is if the desired traits can be measured with little or no error. Do you honestly have this shallow an understanding about how natural and artificial selection work, or are you once again engaging in intellectual dishonesty to try to undermine what you claim to be "Nazi" beliefs? http://health.msn.com/pregnancykids/kidshe...73>1=9145 http://health.msn.com/pregnancykids/kidshe...entid=100154188 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Damn you Ramius and Tom! Your new avatars caused me to spit out my water over a portion of my desk. Thankfully the keyboard and monitor are still intact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 8, 2007 Author Share Posted March 8, 2007 Damn you Ramius and Tom! Your new avatars caused me to spit out my water over a portion of my desk. Thankfully the keyboard and monitor are still intact Some people are so easily amused. Truth be told, I'm somewhat glad DC Tom/Bungee Jumper/what SN should I use today?/ chose the avatar he did. It underscores my earlier point that he'd begin making fun of whichever university I'd attended, no matter what its pedigree. I'm glad I didn't open up my alma mater to that kind of juvenile attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Some people are so easily amused. Truth be told, I'm somewhat glad DC Tom/Bungee Jumper/what SN should I use today?/ chose the avatar he did. It underscores my earlier point that he'd begin making fun of whichever university I'd attended, no matter what its pedigree. I'm glad I didn't open up my alma mater to that kind of juvenile attack. Hey, don't be dissin' Mayor McCheese. He knows far more about math than you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 8, 2007 Author Share Posted March 8, 2007 Hey, don't be dissin' Mayor McCheese. He knows far more about math than you do. Ah yes, once again Bungee Jumper feels the need to insult my math skills. You know, that would actually mean something if I felt you had even a basic understanding of my posts. You don't, and the errors you've made in portraying my views are breathtaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Ah yes, once again Bungee Jumper feels the need to insult my math skills. You know, that would actually mean something if I felt you had even a basic understanding of my posts. You don't, and the errors you've made in portraying my views are breathtaking. I don't need to insult your math skills. You don't have any. You can't even do simple algebra, much less statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Thanks EC. Nice to have someone else mention it. Funny how he wont admit what college he went to. But McDonalds Hamburger U is probably ranked top 50 in hamburger schools. I should ask him what its like having grimace as a professor. I heard that Hamburger U is now #51 much to the dismay of HA. Arbys's State is now #50 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 9, 2007 Author Share Posted March 9, 2007 I heard that Hamburger U is now #51 much to the dismay of HA. Arbys's State is now #50 Does the PPP board have any particular reason for existence beyond the brainless repetition of whatever idiocy may have entered Tom's brain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Does the PPP board have any particular reason for existence beyond the brainless repetition of whatever idiocy may have entered Tom's brain? Yes, that's why Scott created this board. So that everyone parrots Tom. Except for you, that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Does the PPP board have any particular reason for existence beyond the brainless repetition of whatever idiocy may have entered Tom's brain? I find it ironic you call out Tom for repetition when I have seen your posts for months have repetition regarding the regression towards the mean, Wikipedia, the new dice with a 3.5 value etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 9, 2007 Author Share Posted March 9, 2007 I find it ironic you call out Tom for repetition when I have seen your posts for months have repetition regarding the regression towards the mean, Wikipedia, the new dice with a 3.5 value etc... Yes, I participated in the unending debate about regression toward the mean, as did Ramius and Bungee Jumper/DC Tom. Beyond that your memory fails you. I've written less than a handful of posts defending Wikipedia. And the people who keep bringing up the mean value of a die roll are Ramius and Bungee Jumper. The latter, by the way, is just one more example of intellectual dishonesty by those intent on discrediting me. For the purposes of the regression toward the mean discussion, I described someone's "true" I.Q. score as meaning, "the average score someone would get on an I.Q. test if they took it 1000 times, assuming no learning effect or fatigue effect." You then measure this "true" value by giving someone a single I.Q. test. Bungee Jumper subsequently brought dice rolling into the discussion. I responded to that by saying that if you wanted to draw a parallel between rolling a die and an I.Q. test, you'd have to define the "true" value of a die as 3.5, and you'd have to attempt to measure that value by rolling the die a single time. Ever since then, the two of them have put any given pair of ten year olds to shame with their constant and inane jokes about rolling a 3.5 on a die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Does the PPP board have any particular reason for existence beyond the brainless repetition of whatever idiocy may have entered Tom's brain? Yes, you're an independent thinker. Unforunately, it's not an asset when you're wrong all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 9, 2007 Author Share Posted March 9, 2007 you're wrong all the time. DC Tom has at least one functioning brain cell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Yes, I participated in the unending debate about regression toward the mean, as did Ramius and Bungee Jumper/DC Tom. Beyond that your memory fails you. I've written less than a handful of posts defending Wikipedia. And the people who keep bringing up the mean value of a die roll are Ramius and Bungee Jumper. The latter, by the way, is just one more example of intellectual dishonesty by those intent on discrediting me. For the purposes of the regression toward the mean discussion, I described someone's "true" I.Q. score as meaning, "the average score someone would get on an I.Q. test if they took it 1000 times, assuming no learning effect or fatigue effect." You then measure this "true" value by giving someone a single I.Q. test. Bungee Jumper responded by bringing dice rolling into the discussion. I responded to that by saying that if you wanted to draw a parallel between rolling a die and an I.Q. test, you'd have to define the "true" value of a die as 3.5, and you'd have to attempt to measure that value by rolling the die a single time. Ever since then, the two of them have put any given pair of ten year olds to shame with their constant and inane jokes about rolling a 3.5 on a die. Actually, I brought "dice" into it, because a system of multiple dice accurately represents a statistical distribution that demonstrates (as I've demonstrated TWICE now) that regression toward the mean is due to the statistical variance of the distribution and not error of the measurement. You then responded with the example of a "die", which has a "true average roll" of 3.5, which you roll once to attempt to measure its average, thereby causing the die to be in error by the difference between the face value of the die and it's "true average roll" of 3.5. (Never mind that that difference isn't error, it's actually VARIANCE ). You then DENIED THAT YOU EVER SAID IT! Now you're saying that you said it, but you didn't mean it. And this is where DonteWhitner's wrong: you're not repeating yourself. Every post is something new. You keep changing your nonsense theory over and over whenever you get backed into a corner and can't weasel out of being stupid anymore. That's why I find it so amusing...you have found more ways to be completely and utterly incorrect than I even knew were possible. Hell, you'd think by now you would have said something right just out of dumb luck... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I heard that Hamburger U is now #51 much to the dismay of HA. Arbys's State is now #50 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 DC Tom has at least one functioning brain cell. Oh, that showed me. Gee, a die must have a true average roll of 3.5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Some people are so easily amused. Truth be told, I'm somewhat glad DC Tom/Bungee Jumper/what SN should I use today?/ chose the avatar he did. It underscores my earlier point that he'd begin making fun of whichever university I'd attended, no matter what its pedigree. I'm glad I didn't open up my alma mater to that kind of juvenile attack. The real reasons you wont admit your alma mater is 1) its somewhere that is extremely easy to make fun of, and 2)that you're afraid someone here is going to forward your moronic ideas to your university president, and they'll rescind your diploma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts