A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OT Is anyone really surprised?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old January 14th 08, 06:28 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Mike Jacoubowsky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,452
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

wrote in message
...
On Jan 13, 5:01 pm, Bill C wrote:

Hey Mike
I think the point is that this study was trotted out as THE study.
They attacked everyone else who had come to different figures
brutally, claimed they were all biased due to who was doing/
commissioning them, and they claimed to be pure as driven snow.


I do not think you know anything about the technical or methodological
issues surrounding this issue.


He might not.... but then, neither do I. But the discussion is helping some
of us to learn.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


Ads
  #12  
Old January 14th 08, 06:33 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Tom Kunich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,456
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

wrote in message
...

"Soros whose real name is Schwartz"
Do you have a problem with that? It seems like you
think both his Jewishness and his Schwartzishness
are worth mentioning.


I find jackasses such as yourself to be entirely laughable. My grandfather
was Jewish.

Wikipedia says:
"The family [in Hungary] changed its name in 1936 from
Schwartz to Soros, in response to the Fascist threat to Jews."


As my grandfather worked his way across the country from his POE to Cripple
Creek he changed his name a dozen times to prevent anyone from ever finding
out he was Jewish. Why do you suppose that was? After all, it was 1899 and
everyone was so pro-Jew.



  #13  
Old January 14th 08, 06:45 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Tom Kunich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,456
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

wrote in message
...

1. The Burnham study in question had been commissioned in the Fall of
2005 by MIT, using MIT's own internal funding.


I suggest you don't have any clue what the hell you're talking about. Soros
needed only say that he would donate money later to start such a study. But
that sure wouldn't stop you from claiming otherwise.

2. The FoxNews story is incorrect about the estimate itself. The WHO/
MoH study did not estimate that 151,000 people had died since the
invasion in 2003; it estimated that 151,000 people had died of violent
causes since the invasion in 2003. The overall all-cause estimate of
"excess" mortality from the WHO study was 400,000, which was within
the error margin of Burnham's estimate of 650,000.


Here's a clue you nitwit - such a "study" that proclaims "excess deaths" is
a complete and utter fraud. Entire tribes were being wiped out in secret by
Hussein's regime and lousy left wing cowards such as yourself would gladly
claim otherwise despite huge projects such as the swap draining and
testimoney from the swamp arabs that they were being murdered en masse.

Tell me you spineless coward - what were the excess deaths from the American
Revolution - or the Indian Wars? You seem to think that freedom isn't worth
"excess deaths" so perhaps you ought to return to China and live out your
life of luxury there.

  #15  
Old January 14th 08, 06:47 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Howard Kveck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,549
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

In article , "Tom Kunich" [email protected] com
wrote:

wrote in message
...

"Soros whose real name is Schwartz"
Do you have a problem with that? It seems like you
think both his Jewishness and his Schwartzishness
are worth mentioning.


I find jackasses such as yourself to be entirely laughable. My grandfather
was Jewish.


Are you sure he didn't work at a company that invented Judaism?

Wikipedia says:
"The family [in Hungary] changed its name in 1936 from
Schwartz to Soros, in response to the Fascist threat to Jews."


As my grandfather worked his way across the country from his POE to Cripple
Creek he changed his name a dozen times to prevent anyone from ever finding
out he was Jewish. Why do you suppose that was? After all, it was 1899 and
everyone was so pro-Jew.


And your point is... what???????

--
tanx,
Howard

Now it's raining pitchforks and women,
But I've already got a pitchfork...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
  #16  
Old January 14th 08, 07:08 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 631
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

On Jan 13, 9:45 pm, "Tom Kunich" [email protected] com wrote:
wrote in message

...



1. The Burnham study in question had been commissioned in the Fall of
2005 by MIT, using MIT's own internal funding.


I suggest you don't have any clue what the hell you're talking about. Soros
needed only say that he would donate money later to start such a study. But
that sure wouldn't stop you from claiming otherwise.


You can suggest that but not only is there no evidence of this, the
head of the MIT program that commissioned the study already denied
this:
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008...comment-707686


Here's a clue you nitwit - [...] Tell me you spineless coward -


Oh, Tom, there you go again.
  #17  
Old January 14th 08, 07:08 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Howard Kveck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,549
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

In article , "Tom Kunich" [email protected] com
wrote:

Here's a clue you nitwit - such a "study" that proclaims "excess deaths" is
a complete and utter fraud. Entire tribes were being wiped out in secret by
Hussein's regime and lousy left wing cowards such as yourself would gladly
claim otherwise despite huge projects such as the swap draining and
testimoney from the swamp arabs that they were being murdered en masse.


Then why haven't they found the bodies, Tom? They've certainly found many, but not
even close to the number that war-mongers like you like to cite. To use your
phraseology, "here's a clue": what Saddam managed to do in decades, the war that Bush
started managed to do in only 4 3/4 years. If we consider that US soldiers are
wounded on a ratio of about 2.5 to 1, compared to deaths, we ought to be able to
equate that to the Iraqis: that means that there are likely 377,500 wounded Iraqis.
Add in the 4 million refugees. Does that look like a great thing to you?

That you can't acknowledge this is a good clue about your levels of moral
degeneracy.

By the way, where's your proof about that giant chipper you claimed that Saddam
used to grind people up? I guess it's with the missing WMD.

perhaps you ought to return to China and live out your life of luxury there.


Ahh, the REAL Tom Kunich rears his ugly ****ing head.

--
tanx,
Howard

Now it's raining pitchforks and women,
But I've already got a pitchfork...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
  #18  
Old January 14th 08, 07:18 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 631
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

On Jan 13, 9:28 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote:

I do not think you know anything about the technical or methodological
issues surrounding this issue.


He might not.... but then, neither do I. But the discussion is helping some
of us to learn.


What'cha been learning from this discussion thus far?
  #19  
Old January 14th 08, 07:52 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Mike Jacoubowsky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,452
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

wrote in message
...
On Jan 13, 9:28 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote:

I do not think you know anything about the technical or methodological
issues surrounding this issue.


He might not.... but then, neither do I. But the discussion is helping
some
of us to learn.


What'cha been learning from this discussion thus far?


I'd heard of the differing numbers in studies, but really hadn't ever looked
into them. Who was behind what, how they come up with the numbers, that sort
of thing. Although I'm not sure it really matters if it's 100,000 dead or
650,000. If it were a member of your own family that was dead, what
difference would it make if it were even just that one person? And if you're
detached enough that 100,000 doesn't bother you, how do you come up with a
number that would?

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


  #20  
Old January 14th 08, 07:58 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Chester Drawers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

In article ,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Jan 13, 9:28 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote:

I do not think you know anything about the technical or methodological
issues surrounding this issue.

He might not.... but then, neither do I. But the discussion is helping
some
of us to learn.


What'cha been learning from this discussion thus far?


I'd heard of the differing numbers in studies, but really hadn't ever looked
into them. Who was behind what, how they come up with the numbers, that sort
of thing. Although I'm not sure it really matters if it's 100,000 dead or
650,000. If it were a member of your own family that was dead, what
difference would it make if it were even just that one person? And if you're
detached enough that 100,000 doesn't bother you, how do you come up with a
number that would?


Well, it seems pretty straight forward to think that, for those who clamored for
the war, a smaller number of casualties is easier to defend than a big one. Of
course, some people who clamored for the war aren't all that concerned with any
number.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who's Surprised? [email protected] Racing 39 October 22nd 07 05:38 PM
I'm surprised... MagillaGorilla Racing 3 September 5th 06 03:50 AM
Surprised it hasnt been said but... [email protected] Racing 0 February 20th 06 12:07 AM
Surprised, not surprised db. Recumbent Biking 0 January 23rd 06 11:48 PM
Surprised you people aren't talking about this Lame Acer Racing 1 August 20th 04 06:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.