View Poll Results: Who bombed the Wisonsin Planned Parenthood?

Voters
54. You may not vote on this poll
  • A conservative, who is against PP

    11 20.37%
  • A liberal, who wants PP back in the news

    1 1.85%
  • I haven't a clue

    7 12.96%
  • I don't care. I just want this criminal arrested

    35 64.81%
Page 14 of 20 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 199

Thread: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

  1. #131
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    I'm sorry, you're not going to convince me graffiti should be categorized as 'terrorism.
    Vandalism and trespassing often involve more than graffiti. You argument is dishonest
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  2. #132
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,831

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by CRUE CAB View Post
    Niether is killing the unborn.
    you are welcome to that opinion
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  3. #133
    King Conspiratard
    Dr. Chuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-14 @ 03:04 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    12,895

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Yes.

    Both vandalism and trespassing disrupt the activities of the clinic, which is the goal of those terrorists - using violence to interfere with their normal operations
    vandalism and trespassing are not classified as violent crimes

  4. #134
    King Conspiratard
    Dr. Chuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-14 @ 03:04 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    12,895

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Vandalism and trespassing often involve more than graffiti. You argument is dishonest
    while there certainly are other forms of vandalism, graffiti would also be classified as vandalism

  5. #135
    King Conspiratard
    Dr. Chuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-14 @ 03:04 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    12,895

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Not truw

    What that argument indicates is that someone will commit an act of violence


    No, he wrote the logical result of 'religious brainwashing" and listening to people describe the fetus as a baby is a person going out and doing things like bombing an abortion clinic. And it's the same position he has been defending since he made it

  6. #136
    Professor

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    06-21-17 @ 12:55 PM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,577

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    It shows here that 25% of all clinics have experienced severe violence. I think that's significantly higher than most other fields.
    National Clinic Access Project - Clinic Surveys - Feminist Majority Foundation
    I looked into the 2010 report your Feminist Majority Foundation did and found reason for concern.

    First of all, the basic math does not add up. They list 357 respondants to their violence and harassment survey. They claim that 23.5% of the respondants reported "severe violence," which woud be 84 out of 357 respondants. Severe Violence they defined as one of 11 possible things, and they listed the percent of respondants who claimed to be victims of an act of each type of "Severe Violence." The basic incongruency is this: there is no possible way that the numbers they list can equal up to 23.5% of the 2010 respondants they say claim to be victim of a severe violent act. If you do that math and even generously assume that all categories are mutually exclusive (each responding facility only was listed in one category [the report explicitly states this is not the case]), the maximum total number of facilities which could have reported an act of severe violence is only roughly 14.5% of respondants (or 72 clinics). It is worse, however, as the report mentions that there was a concentration of violence in a small number of clinics (so one clinic could have acts listed from 2+ categories). This means that several clinics are counted more than once in the aggragate sum of percentages (14.5% or 72 clinics). So, the actual number of clinics that have been the target of "severe violence" as defined in the study is likely a good deal less than even the 14.5% aggragate. There is literally no possible way, given the statistics they provide, that 84 clinics (or 23.5% of responding clinics) could have reported to be the target of an act of "severe violence."

    On an ethical level, the representation of the data in the initial page you present is trash. The graph's title says it represents the "Percentage of Clinics Experiencing Severe Violence." That is extremely misleading. It is actually the percentage of responding clinics that reported experiencing severe violence. Roughly 40% (238) of the clinics did not respond to the 2010 survey. While one might think it safe to generalize the percent found by responders to the nonresponding clinics, it could easily be the case that the reason so many clinics did not respond was because they were not the target of any violent attacks (we call this a "selection effect"). This alternative explanation is supported by the evidence in the most recent report that the number of clinics reporting that they are not the target of any violence is increasing rapidly. If you run the numbers considering the non-respondants, only about 12% of all clinics could have responded that they were the target of an act of "severe violence." However, taking into consideration the summation issue addressed in the previous paragraph, the actual percent of clinics who reported they were the target of severe violence is lower than that. This indicates that the title of the graph would lead people to believe that the actual percent of clinics reporting at least one act of severe violence is over twice what the actual percent probably is.

    Combining the shady number crunching with the misrepresentation of those numbers leads me to believe that the people conducting and reporting this study are scientifically incompetent at best, or ethically bankrupt and agenda driven at worst. Considering that these are probably professionals putting the study togather, I think the more likely explanation is the latter.
    Last edited by CycloneWanderer; 09-24-13 at 03:58 PM.

  7. #137
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    vandalism and trespassing are not classified as violent crimes
    Terrorism is a violent crime
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  8. #138
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    while there certainly are other forms of vandalism, graffiti would also be classified as vandalism
    Your description of the vandalism committed against abortion clinics as "graffiti" is dishonest
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  9. #139
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    No, he wrote the logical result of 'religious brainwashing" and listening to people describe the fetus as a baby is a person going out and doing things like bombing an abortion clinic. And it's the same position he has been defending since he made it
    Yes, his argument is that "someone" will commit an act of violence and is not what you dishonestly claimed in your earlier post:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Chuckles View Post
    What that argument indicates a very large majority of the millions of people that adopt such a position should be out committing these acts of violence.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  10. #140
    Professor

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    06-21-17 @ 12:55 PM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,577

    Re: A Planned Parenthood Clinic In Wisconsin Was BOMBED Last Night

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneWanderer View Post
    I looked into the 2010 report your Feminist Majority Foundation did and found reason for concern.

    First of all, the basic math does not add up. They list 357 respondants to their violence and harassment survey. They claim that 23.5% of the respondants reported "severe violence," which woud be 84 out of 357 respondants. Severe Violence they defined as one of 11 possible things, and they listed the percent of respondants who claimed to be victims of an act of each type of "Severe Violence." The basic incongruency is this: there is no possible way that the numbers they list can equal up to 23.5% of the 2010 respondants they say claim to be victim of a severe violent act. If you do that math and even generously assume that all categories are mutually exclusive (each responding facility only was listed in one category [the report explicitly states this is not the case]), the maximum total number of facilities which could have reported an act of severe violence is only roughly 14.5% of respondants (or 72 clinics). It is worse, however, as the report mentions that there was a concentration of violence in a small number of clinics (so one clinic could have acts listed from 2+ categories). This means that several clinics are counted more than once in the aggragate sum of percentages (14.5% or 72 clinics). So, the actual number of clinics that have been the target of "severe violence" as defined in the study is likely a good deal less than even the 14.5% aggragate. There is literally no possible way, given the statistics they provide, that 84 clinics (or 23.5% of responding clinics) could have reported to be the target of an act of "severe violence."

    On an ethical level, the representation of the data in the initial page you present is trash. The graph's title says it represents the "Percentage of Clinics Experiencing Severe Violence." That is extremely misleading. It is actually the percentage of responding clinics that reported experiencing severe violence. Roughly 40% (238) of the clinics did not respond to the 2010 survey. While one might think it safe to generalize the percent found by responders to the nonresponding clinics, it could easily be the case that the reason so many clinics did not respond was because they were not the target of any violent attacks (we call this a "selection effect"). This alternative explanation is supported by the evidence in the most recent report that the number of clinics reporting that they are not the target of any violence is increasing rapidly. If you run the numbers considering the non-respondants, only about 12% of all clinics could have responded that they were the target of an act of "severe violence." However, taking into consideration the summation issue addressed in the previous paragraph, the actual percent of clinics who reported they were the target of severe violence is lower than that. This indicates that the title of the graph would lead people to believe that the actual percent of clinics reporting at least one act of severe violence is over twice what the actual percent probably is.

    Combining the shady number crunching with the misrepresentation of those numbers leads me to believe that the people conducting and reporting this study are scientifically incompetent at best, or ethically bankrupt and agenda driven at worst. Considering that these are probably professionals putting the study togather, I think the more likely explanation is the latter.
    tl;dr

Page 14 of 20 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •