| <Deleted> |
<Deleted> |
2007-07-10 16:17:38 |
| This message has been moderated down, score -1 :) |
|
|
|
*invokes Godwin's Law* (n/t) | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 15:06:59 |
|
In an ultimate twist of irony, I'd like to | by hadji | 2007-07-10 15:16:44 |
|
And just as a side note . . . | by hadji | 2007-07-10 15:19:41 |
|
I've said before if the U.S. wanted to invade | by toysbfun | 2007-07-10 15:21:12 |
|
You keep your hands off our drugs! =) (n/t) | by williamashbless | 2007-07-10 15:45:05 |
|
I could use some good drugs now | by joecrouse | 2007-07-10 15:58:00 |
|
Again discussing standards of evidence | by esbita | 2007-07-10 15:19:09 |
|
When it helps one's agenda, of course. (n/t) | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 15:22:17 |
|
Well, come ON...they interviewed *50* people! | by SnArL | 2007-07-10 15:23:06 |
|
1001 or so. | by esbita | 2007-07-10 17:36:53 |
|
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. | by Peace_man | 2007-07-10 15:19:14 |
|
Of course violence is bad. | by krikkert | 2007-07-10 15:31:13 |
|
Justified to whom? | by Peace_man | 2007-07-10 16:06:04 |
|
Justification in the eyes of the law. | by krikkert | 2007-07-10 16:16:19 |
|
what about committing violence to stop | by bastetsmuse | 2007-07-10 15:37:31 |
|
I did mention a certain amount of | by Peace_man | 2007-07-10 16:09:44 |
|
BTW, that needs to be ID9Ked. Mods! | by hadji | 2007-07-10 15:22:35 |
|
Pretending you didn't mention the Nazis — shocking | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 15:23:48 |
|
I'm sorry...did you FAIL statistics? | by SnArL | 2007-07-10 15:25:47 |
|
I don't think Arachnid claimed this to be | by Peace_man | 2007-07-10 15:27:32 |
|
50 out of 10 thousands? (n/t) | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 15:30:19 |
|
100 thousands (n/t) | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 15:45:48 |
|
Are you saying that it's OK if it is only | by Peace_man | 2007-07-10 16:13:18 |
|
That depends entirely on what kind of statement | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 16:22:08 |
|
That depends, are they really soldiers? | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 17:48:54 |
|
Was wondering on methodology | by esbita | 2007-07-10 19:17:05 |
|
Ooh! Didyouknow didyouknow didyouknow! | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 16:05:57 |
|
Nice. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 16:10:28 |
|
Summary: 50 is a large enough sample. | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 16:19:09 |
|
Yes, I understood that. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 16:22:04 |
|
:-) I'm sure others will cast a critical eye on it (n/t) | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 16:23:09 |
|
Owww, horrid memories of sophomore year! | by esbita | 2007-07-10 17:40:32 |
|
That, and it's not the most clearly-written | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 17:49:43 |
|
Yeah, but this is hardly a random sample. | by esbita | 2007-07-10 19:18:03 |
|
We don't know how many of the 50 had such stories. | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 15:35:27 |
|
Since when is 50 people considered enough | by krikkert | 2007-07-10 15:28:08 |
|
Actually, it's not a bad sample size. | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 16:08:25 |
|
Provided that it is truly random. | by krikkert | 2007-07-10 16:11:15 |
|
Impossible? Why? | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 16:20:39 |
|
Mostly because | by krikkert | 2007-07-10 16:22:07 |
|
Oh, by 'given situation' you mean 'performed by a | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 16:28:02 |
|
I meant 'in this given situation', yeah. | by krikkert | 2007-07-10 16:31:17 |
|
Well, yeah. You'll notice that I | by Esteis | 2007-07-10 16:47:16 |
|
I think they do have bearing. | by esbita | 2007-07-10 19:20:41 |
|
There is one other good reason. | by lheggland | 2007-07-10 17:43:06 |
|
Strangely... | by thread_killer | 2007-07-10 19:52:55 |
|
And that just proves my point. | by lheggland | 2007-07-10 20:07:45 |
|
Moderated: non-FYOS safe language in link | by purplepineapple | 2007-07-10 16:18:16 |
|
May I chime in? | by thread_killer | 2007-07-10 18:14:22 |
|
Was hoping you would. | by esbita | 2007-07-10 19:23:05 |
|
It's not a study, nor accurate | by subbywan | 2007-07-10 19:22:57 |
