(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

Statistics are evul! Fuck science!

njyoder
2007-04-14 03:06 am UTC (link)

Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything, you're right. I love how many people here are anti-science. Yes, your anti-scientific views make you look like a genius. Fuck studies that could possibly show you to be wrong.

Just so we're clear, since no one here has read such a study, studies include these things called statistics!

And maybe I'm wrong here, but sometimes the abused lie to the police even when they come over! Amazing!

But hey, lets not dare consult someone at a DV organization, an expert in this, to come and help her in private! The horror!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!

vzg
2007-04-14 03:33 am UTC (link)

Yeah, and the police would never believe a woman was being beaten if she said she wasn't when they came over in the middle of it. I mean, if I saw a woman get beat to bleeding and bruised, I'd believe her the second she turned around and told me nothing happened! Amazing. Just like I believe people on the internet when they claim to know a lot about a subject and yet give no evidence whatsoever about any of their claims and then insist that everyone hates statistics because, hey, they'd maybe want to help someone out of the goodness of their heart! Obviously trying to help means you hate statistics. When you soothe a friend who's crying? Why, you're a statistics hater! Because I can tell you without any evidence to back it up that statistics SHOW that when you soothe that friend, she's actually fifty times as likely to kill herself!

And gee, I guess I should stop listening to all the other people who tell me that if I think I know someone's being abused, I should tell someone about it. Because there's only one domestic violence expert in the world, and they have STATISTICS.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!

njyoder
2007-04-14 07:34 am UTC (link)

I mean, if I saw a woman get beat to bleeding and bruised, I'd believe her the second she turned around and told me nothing happened!

Clearly, everything happens in real life just as you envision it. Please, show me your internet Ph.D. Mr. Expert.

Just like I believe people on the internet when they claim to know a lot about a subject and yet give no evidence whatsoever about any of their claims and then insist that everyone hates statistics because, hey, they'd maybe want to help someone out of the goodness of their heart!

Valuing first hand experience over scientific studies makes you anti-science. Did you forget what you said?

Why should we believe you again? You have presented no evidence, but we should believe YOU! Oh, double standards.

When you soothe a friend who's crying? Why, you're a statistics hater! Because I can tell you without any evidence to back it up that statistics SHOW that when you soothe that friend, she's actually fifty times as likely to kill herself!

Ridiculous false analogy.

And gee, I guess I should stop listening to all the other people who tell me that if I think I know someone's being abused, I should tell someone about it.

I never said that you shouldn't tell anyone. Reading what people write helps, instead of spewing random, ignorant tripe.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!

vzg
2007-04-14 08:00 am UTC (link)

Thinking "Hey, if I could get the police to catch the fucker in the act lock him up so this poor woman actually has a chance to get away" needs a PhD?

I never said I valued first-hand experience over scientific studies. You say I'm ridiculous. :P And I presented no "facts" that I asked anyone to believe. In fact, I didn't ask anyone to believe anything! What am I asking you to believe? I mean, go ahead, believe whatever you'd like. Believe I'm Satan or a robot or whatever. Doesn't bother me.

Ha. Ha. Ha. It makes about as much sense as your own logic.

I read as much as I could stand of your comments. I try not to subject myself to the mind-numbing torture of reading on and on when I know the person doing the writing is just getting more belligerent and ridiculous as they go on.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!

njyoder
2007-04-14 08:11 am UTC (link)

Thinking "Hey, if I could get the police to catch the fucker in the act lock him up so this poor woman actually has a chance to get away" needs a PhD?

That's where your ignorance comes in. Abuse is cyclical. Abuse victims *gasp* defend their abusers and deny abuse. You even said that. They don't just get up and run away at the first opportunity, they GO BACK TO THEM.

You knew this and yet you thought it was a simple matter of letting them get away? Are you that dense? What do you think he'd do once he got out of jail? Durrrh.

If this were about simply physically getting away, they'd have done it a long time ago! But you're right, they are physically incapable of dialing 911 and are physically incapable of exiting the house when the abuser isn't home. Please study at least the basics of the psychology of abuse before you spout more ignorance.

So show me your Ph.D. already.

I never said I valued first-hand experience over scientific studies

Then why did you say: "Firsthand experience means nothing in the face of math, right?"

Were you being sarcastic or not? Make up your mind.

And I presented no "facts" that I asked anyone to believe. In fact, I didn't ask anyone to believe anything!

Aside from suggesting that it's a fact that the approach you stated is the best approach. Telling people that your view is the right one definitely isn't asking them to believe anything, you're right! Oh wait...

But hey, if you want it to be explicit, I never explicitly said that I wanted anyone to believe anything either! Amazing double standard you have there.

I read as much as I could stand of your comments.

So what's it like being proud of your ignorance?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!

vzg
2007-04-14 08:21 am UTC (link)

No, I kind of thought, "If that fucker's away, someone can get them help that they wouldn't be able to get real easily if he were right there breathing down her neck." So, you know, she WOULDN'T. Because I'd rather try and get her some therapy and figure out a way to make her STOP going back than just sit there and say, "Well, damn, she's going to back. Shouldn't bother, then, I guess."

Uuuh, not sarcastic, but two things can coexist. Wthout the people being abused, there would be no abuse statistics. Firsthand experience MAKES UP the numbers. Every experience matters, and every experience counts. Of course, at the same time, the overall numbers should have some bearing, but neither completely outweighs the other. Acting like firsthand experience means nothing is just as stupid as acting like statistics mean nothing.

Hey, I'm not saying it's a fact. It's my view on the matter — I'm not putting it in textbooks, telling everyone my ideas on the subject are the only ones worth considering.

And please, stop this "double standards" bullshit. Stretch all you like, but I'm not he one still hiding behind numbers yet to be presented. You want people to take you seriously? Show them some proof that you know what you're talking about. If you'd shown people some evidence from a credible source — namely, the statistics you keep talking about — you wouldn't have half as many people getting pissed off as you do.

Not saying I'm proud of it, but I have better things to do than shuffle through a couple hours worth of comments just to try and fiure out if there was a valid point buried in there anywhere. After the first fifteen minutes of scouring, I moved on. Of course, then I was stupid enough to bother commenting, and I'm juuust short-tempered enough to come back when people respond.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!

njyoder
2007-04-14 08:28 am UTC (link)

"Well, damn, she's going to back. Shouldn't bother, then, I guess."

This is where that 'reading' thing comes in handy. Numerous times I had to repeat myself stating that I'd get her help because idiots like you couldn't read. I, on the other hand, wouldn't try to piss off the aggressor in the process of getting her help.

Firsthand experience MAKES UP the numbers. Every experience matters, and every experience counts. Of course, at the same time, the overall numbers should have some bearing, but neither completely outweighs the other.

That doesn't make them equivalent. Statistics definitely outweigh first hand experience. If you read the situation that was at hand, you'd note that little was known about the woman, hence you have to make a guess of what's most likely to work and what you want to avoid. You can't do probability without statistics of some kind.

And please, stop this "double standards" bullshit.

I will when you stop demanding I give sources while simultaneously a) not providing any sources yourselves and b) not reading what I say.

Not saying I'm proud of it, but I have better things to do than shuffle through a couple hours worth of comments just to try and fiure out if there was a valid point buried in there anywhere.

All you had to read was my first one. Duurrh.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! mistressrenet 2007-04-15 01:53 am UTC (link)
	Shit, all this time I thought you were Dancing Lex Luthor. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! pooka 2007-04-14 03:34 am UTC (link)
	I fucked Science once. He wasn't as passionate as Religion, but he knew where everything was and didn't go on and on with the whining about sin and guilt afterwards. Ah, Science. Sometimes I miss that cold, clinical bastard. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	*applause* wolfie_thu 2007-04-14 06:23 am UTC (link)
	I loled. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! seiberwing 2007-04-14 07:10 pm UTC (link)
	http://community.livejournal.com/anthropomor_fic/54234.html#cutid1 You were saying? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! pooka 2007-04-14 07:19 pm UTC (link)
	I knew those sluts were screwing around on me. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! seiberwing 2007-04-14 08:49 pm UTC (link)
	That comm is great win. Go check out Meta/Fandom. (Reply to this)(Parent)

Reality is evul! Fuck facts!
bigi
2007-04-14 05:59 am UTC (link)

Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything, you're right. I love how many people here are anti-science. Yes, your anti-scientific views make you look like a genius. Fuck studies that could possibly show you to be wrong.

Ah, in that case, my dad, two uncles and cousin were all cops with the Chicago Police Department. Combined they have nearly 100 years of experience.

And they all think your advice is idiotic.

My ancedotal evidence > Yours.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Reality is evul! Fuck facts! njyoder 2007-04-14 06:05 am UTC (link)
	You seem to have missed the point that anecdotal evidence is fallacious to use in an argument like this. I like this thing called 'science,' not 'random opinions of different people.' (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Reality is evul! Fuck facts! ecchaniz0r 2007-04-14 12:02 pm UTC (link)
	lol (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Reality is evul! Fuck facts! pooka 2007-04-14 07:23 pm UTC (link)
	Oh good, you've gotten funnier. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! eilan 2007-04-14 07:26 am UTC (link)
	Yes, we all hate science. Because, you know, we believe that you have to cite your sources even if you don't quote and just reference them. That's so un-scientific! Okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! njyoder 2007-04-14 07:29 am UTC (link)
	This thread has nothing to do with citing sources. It has to do with some idiot denying that the utility of statistics. But hey, you don't read comments, so what do you care? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! eilan 2007-04-14 07:51 am UTC (link)
	Yes! You are so right! You have enlightened me! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! ecchaniz0r 2007-04-14 12:02 pm UTC (link)
	lol (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Oh, sweetie! lurker32 2007-04-14 06:39 pm UTC (link)
	It's really okay if you don't give all your comments sarcastic subject lines. We all just assume that you're taking the preceding remarks as far out of context as you can drag them anyway. There's no need to make sure we get it. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Oh, sweetie!

njyoder
2007-04-14 06:50 pm UTC (link)

When I have taken anything out of context? The "please give me sources" bullshit is pretty clear. How the other guy's "statistics and individual personal experience are equally valid" bullshit?

And BY THE WAY, I just got finished commenting to someone in another post who insisted that those *obviously sarcastic* remarks weren't actually sarcasm and that I was backpedaling. So really, I'm not going to assume the slightest bit of intelligence here--everything needs to be made blindingly obvious.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! mistressrenet 2007-04-15 02:13 am UTC (link)
	Okay, FINE, I give in. Jeri Ryan is kind of hot. Dammit. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -