Jump to content

eyeball

Senior Member
  • Posts

    30,362
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

eyeball last won the day on November 26

eyeball had the most liked content!

2 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Earth

Recent Profile Visitors

26,125 profile views

eyeball's Achievements

Grand Master

Grand Master (14/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • First Post
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Collaborator
  • Reacting Well Rare

Recent Badges

2.2k

Reputation

  1. WCM certainly isn't the first one to ignore the fallacy in fact it looks like a fairly common denier/refuser tactic so surely by now actual scientists doing the research and studies and who prefer to read the data have come up with several papers on why the fallacy doesn't apply here. Do you have any? I'm assuming you agree with WCM it doesn't mean a thing here.
  2. You're saying after almost 150 years as one of the most respected scientific publications on the planet they couldn't ensure an article on a well known phenomenon was correct? Okay let's see what others have to say. https://www.google.com/search?q=base+rate+fallacy+vaccine&rlz=1CAUBRP_enCA1026&sxsrf=ALiCzsahxnEuLzQcFazXgdnN-KR7hCZARA%3A1669689325718&ei=7W-FY6vDK5DL0PEPs4O_4AQ&ved=0ahUKEwjr7ZO5rdL7AhWQJTQIHbPBD0wQ4dUDCA8&uact=5&oq=base+rate+fallacy+vaccine&gs_lcp=Cgxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAQAzIFCAAQgAQyBggAEBYQHjIFCAAQhgM6CggAEEcQ1gQQsAM6BQgAEKIEOgoIABCABBCxAxANOgcIABCABBANOggIABCABBCxAzoICAAQFhAeEA86BwghEKABEApKBAhBGABKBAhGGABQ2g5Yh_sBYMv-AWgJcAF4AIABhQGIAcUfkgEFMTguMjGYAQCgAQHIAQfAAQE&sclient=gws-wiz-serp Right from the get go above starts with This next explanation of what this fallacy means fits WasteCanMan to a tee; It goes on and on. So while figuring out yourself what a base rate fallacy is, especially as it relates to vaccines, feel free to fInd anything in here or anywhere else that conflicts with what Scientific American said it means. I'll say right now that if whatever you come up with is alongside links to evidence of a flat Earth or protection from chemtrails that'll be our first clue that you're probably on LSD or something.
  3. You also know what Scientific American said. You're putting them in the same league as CNN? Seriously?
  4. I'd still know you're deflecting to avoid addressing your case rate fallacy and how Scientific American is in on the conspiracy to cancel you and advance the cause of Big Pharma, the World Wide Communist agenda and...fluoridation too for all I know. In any case I still say people becoming convinced that the right-wing is far far to saturated with dingbats and conspiratards to be trusted with our governance is why conservatives can't make headway. Thanks for being such an endless graphic evidence of why.
  5. No, everything you've said is 100% wrong because your intent is to evade your case rate fallacy.
  6. No what I basically said is the hooey you add to your solution reads like this; =2 + 2 See the difference?
  7. Predicting 6 - 18 months out is easy enough but I can also look at how fisheries managers are under or worse mismanaging fish stocks and incorporate that into my long term calculus. That said I can mitigate for decline I'll like face over time by counting on prices for fish to increase as they become more scarce. From the fisherman's perspective staying in business still makes sense because he's still making the same relative to the cost of being there. As long as industry is doing okay that way it's managers are under less pressure to change much if anything. Then the stock collapses....like the sudden shock of hitting a rock that everyone nonetheless knew was close by. I disagree you can't control for this but you really have to want to before you can. It's too easy to sing la la la with fingers inserted you know where.
  8. You routinely come in here proclaiming you know 100% what people mean when you read between their lines. Go urinate up a rope. Everyone knows exactly 100% what you "said".
  9. Then negotiate for that. They can just fine when they're in possession of a modern treaty. I lived half a mile up the road from a reserve that was on Crown land for some 30 years. We've come to regard it as a village that's on First Nation Territory for 11 years or so now. Exceptions for GST/PST (on purchases anywhere) ended in 2019, the Nations will start collecting land taxes from home owners in the village and Territory in 2024, the same year Ottawa starts collecting tax on income earned by First Nations on their Territory. But in answer to your question (how long) I suspect it will still take a couple generations where modern treaties still don't exist. And remember, you probably shouldn't say it can't be done when people are actually doing it.
  10. Hmmm. https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/canadas-income-inequality-surged-under-harper-analysis_n_16869570 Righties who don't swing both ways would usually write them off as lefties because they're commies. The amount of power doled out to people by a dictator is typically very conservative and anything but progressive. I would point to the way Trudeau handled or was handled by SNC Lavalin as evidence of right-wing proclivity. Trump stumps for the 'regular guy' too, they all do. So what? If conservatives couldn't support it they coulda shoulda put a stop to them. They've had plenty of opportunities to do so over the last 150 years or so. Assigning liability to a political leaning won't work any more than assigning it to individuals, the scope of the cost can only be borne by institutions meaning us. I would hope that the cost of settlements following reconciliation would spur all of us to demand more robust systems of accountability so that we're not left in such costly lurches in the future. Wait until people start suing governments on the grounds they're liable for damages done when dragging their feet on climate change initiatives if it can be shown this foot-dragging increased the damage. Do you think ideology will get anyone off the hook? Instead of the great emphasis placed on the division between right and left I'd much prefer we place that emphasis on the gulf between governed and governments.
  11. It's not completely hopeless, I think we've turned the wheel at least, we should see the bow swinging in response in time but these things don't always turn on a dime.
  12. Like driving a boat at night in the fog with no electronics. It can be done but I'd be inclined to anchor up and see how things look in the morning.
  13. Yup that's got to be right up there with taking 9/11 truthers and chemtrails seriously.
×
×
  • Create New...