| War in Iraq Lancet study validity in doubt; Billo and I have butted heads on this issue before. You might as well stop wasting your time, he is ... |
02-24-08, 02:27 PM
|
#241 (permalink)
| | Grace under pressure
Join Date: Apr 2007 Last Online: Today 04:54 PM Location: Atop my detractors
Posts: 5,637
Thanks: 66
Thanked 91 Times in 53 Posts
Lean: Slightly Liberal Gender:  Awards:
Current Mood: | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Billo and I have butted heads on this issue before. You might as well stop wasting your time, he is like a dog with a bone on this. He will never change his line of thinking here.
__________________ Obama/Biden in 2008! |
| |
02-24-08, 02:31 PM
|
#242 (permalink)
| | standby one
Join Date: Sep 2007 Last Online: Today 06:19 PM Location: New Jersey
Posts: 7,849
Thanks: 590
Thanked 900 Times in 687 Posts
Lean: Very Conservative Gender:  Awards:
Current Mood: | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffMerriman Billo and I have butted heads on this issue before. You might as well stop wasting your time, he is like a dog with a bone on this. He will never change his line of thinking here. |
You call that train wreck of illogic a line?  |
| |
02-24-08, 03:37 PM
|
#243 (permalink)
| | Grace under pressure
Join Date: Apr 2007 Last Online: Today 04:54 PM Location: Atop my detractors
Posts: 5,637
Thanks: 66
Thanked 91 Times in 53 Posts
Lean: Slightly Liberal Gender:  Awards:
Current Mood: | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und You call that train wreck of illogic a line?  | Well Billo and I agree that this war was an abortion of lies and half-truths, but he just loses me when he runs with the "Bush is responsible for a million deaths thing." I can't stand Bush and I believe he (through his rush to an unnecessary war) is responsible for ten of thousands of deaths, probably around 100,000. But a million? No, not really.
We should have never invaded Iraq. However, if we are going to examine the death toll and assess responsibility we should at least be reasonable in the body count. I called the Lancet study out a long time ago and got the same treatment you did Rev. |
| |
02-24-08, 03:43 PM
|
#244 (permalink)
| | standby one
Join Date: Sep 2007 Last Online: Today 06:19 PM Location: New Jersey
Posts: 7,849
Thanks: 590
Thanked 900 Times in 687 Posts
Lean: Very Conservative Gender:  Awards:
Current Mood: | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffMerriman Well Billo and I agree that this war was an abortion of lies and half-truths, but he just loses me when he runs with the "Bush is responsible for a million deaths thing." I can't stand Bush and I believe he (through his rush to an unnecessary war) is responsible for ten of thousands of deaths, probably around 100,000. But a million? No, not really.
We should have never invaded Iraq. However, if we are going to examine the death toll and assess responsibility we should at least be reasonable in the body count. I called the Lancet study out a long time ago and got the same treatment you did Rev. |
Well I can respect your opinion on the war and what not. His logic though is something to behold. Not once has he discussed the other studies debunking it other than by his own admission pleaded mental incompetency and cut and ran. There is no discussion here. Just billio posting nonsense and lies.
Strange. |
| |
02-24-08, 04:19 PM
|
#245 (permalink)
| | Litre of the Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005 Last Online: 08-17-08 02:16 PM Location: HBCA
Posts: 17,980
Thanks: 352
Thanked 753 Times in 547 Posts
Lean: Very Liberal Gender:  | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und Well I can respect your opinion on the war and what not. His logic though is something to behold. Not once has he discussed the other studies debunking it other than by his own admission pleaded mental incompetency and cut and ran. There is no discussion here. Just billio posting nonsense and lies.
Strange. | Again with the name-calling!
What did I say that was "non-sense" and what "lie" did I tell?
And what post did I admit "mental incompetency"? Is it where I said I didn't understand that statistician's article? I've asked you several times to explain the finer points of it and you've failed to do so. Are you mentally incompetant as well?
__________________ "Political correctness is tyranny with manners"
- Charlton Heston |
| |
02-24-08, 04:23 PM
|
#246 (permalink)
| | Litre of the Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005 Last Online: 08-17-08 02:16 PM Location: HBCA
Posts: 17,980
Thanks: 352
Thanked 753 Times in 547 Posts
Lean: Very Liberal Gender:  | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffMerriman Billo and I have butted heads on this issue before. You might as well stop wasting your time, he is like a dog with a bone on this. He will never change his line of thinking here. | There's nothing to change, Jeff. Lancet is a very reputable institution. There is nothing wrong with believing a report published by them from by other reputable institutions John's Hopkins and Columbia University. I have not dismissed any other reports on this issue. Yet I keep getting bombarded and crucified by other members and moderators because of my position.
That's fine by me. They can think whatever they want. No one, absolutely no one, can say for sure how many deaths have resulted from our decision to go to war. And that's the only reason I hold Bush (and all of us) responsible. Because it was OUR DECISION to do this. |
| |
02-24-08, 04:26 PM
|
#247 (permalink)
| | Litre of the Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005 Last Online: 08-17-08 02:16 PM Location: HBCA
Posts: 17,980
Thanks: 352
Thanked 753 Times in 547 Posts
Lean: Very Liberal Gender:  | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und You call that train wreck of illogic a line?  | You wouldn't know logic if I shoved it up you butt and out your mouth then turned around and tattooed it on your forehead! |
| |
02-24-08, 04:43 PM
|
#248 (permalink)
| | Grace under pressure
Join Date: Apr 2007 Last Online: Today 04:54 PM Location: Atop my detractors
Posts: 5,637
Thanks: 66
Thanked 91 Times in 53 Posts
Lean: Slightly Liberal Gender:  Awards:
Current Mood: | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Quote:
Originally Posted by Billo_Really There's nothing to change, Jeff. Lancet is a very reputable institution. There is nothing wrong with believing a report published by them from by other reputable institutions John's Hopkins and Columbia University. I have not dismissed any other reports on this issue. Yet I keep getting bombarded and crucified by other members and moderators because of my position.
That's fine by me. They can think whatever they want. No one, absolutely no one, can say for sure how many deaths have resulted from our decision to go to war. And that's the only reason I hold Bush (and all of us) responsible. Because it was OUR DECISION to do this. | I'm not saying Lancet isn't reputable. What I am saying is there are a lot of other reputable individuals challenging their findings. It's a case of disagreement between those in the know. The rest of us are left to decipher it. From what I can tell, based upon all I have read, the Lancet group are in the minority on what the commonly held belief is regarding the actual number of deaths directly attributable to U.S./Coalition actions.
And I agree with you on this point...Bush and his administration are to be held accountable for these deaths. |
| | | The Following User Says Thank You to Lerxst For This Useful Post: | |
02-25-08, 08:26 AM
|
#249 (permalink)
| | standby one
Join Date: Sep 2007 Last Online: Today 06:19 PM Location: New Jersey
Posts: 7,849
Thanks: 590
Thanked 900 Times in 687 Posts
Lean: Very Conservative Gender:  Awards:
Current Mood: | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Quote:
Originally Posted by Billo_Really You wouldn't know logic if I shoved it up you butt and out your mouth then turned around and tattooed it on your forehead! |
tsk..... tsk.... Mr. billo (there I left out the extra "I") the sure sign someone is losing the debate is to sink into such low brow nonsense.
I do not understand why you are so male analy fixated suffice to say I dig chicks, not d00ds. Quote:
Originally Posted by Billo_Really Again with the name-calling! |
My bad, I don't know why I put that extra I in there. Quote:
What did I say that was "non-sense" and what "lie" did I tell?
And what post did I admit "mental incompetency"? Is it where I said I didn't understand that statistician's article? I've asked you several times to explain the finer points of it and you've failed to do so. Are you mentally incompetant as well?
|
No you have not. not once! I offered to help you understand any part of it that is giving you trouble. |
| |
02-25-08, 11:37 AM
|
#250 (permalink)
| | Litre of the Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005 Last Online: 08-17-08 02:16 PM Location: HBCA
Posts: 17,980
Thanks: 352
Thanked 753 Times in 547 Posts
Lean: Very Liberal Gender:  | Re: Lancet study validity in doubt Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und tsk..... tsk.... Mr. billo (there I left out the extra "I") the sure sign someone is losing the debate is to sink into such low brow nonsense.
I do not understand why you are so male analy fixated suffice to say I dig chicks, not d00ds.
My bad, I don't know why I put that extra I in there.
No you have not. not once! I offered to help you understand any part of it that is giving you trouble. | Hey, your the one engaged in childish name-calling, not me. And I did ask you to explain it and you haven't. |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | | |