JohnRich 4 #76 April 18, 2004 QuoteA study I read about found that a person is SIX TIMES more likely to be mugged in London than in New York City. John, help me out here were a link to that study or a story about it, please. I don't know if this is exactly what you're after, but it is similar: "PEOPLE living in England and Wales are at greater risk of falling victim to crime than citizens of most other industrialised nations, according to a study published yesterday. "The International Crime Victims Survey, based on 34,000 telephone interviews across 17 countries, found that 26 per cent of people - more than one in four - in England and Wales had been victims of crime in 1999. The figure for Scotland was 23 per cent and in Northern Ireland 15 per cent." Full Story Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,534 #77 April 18, 2004 Quote"PEOPLE living in England and Wales are at greater risk of falling victim to crime than citizens of most other industrialised nations, according to a study published yesterday. Is that because of all our cameras or did you all get dragged into a side debate about things that go bang? (And to clear up an earlier question yes Belfast is part of the UK, 'United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' but are the twin towers fatalities included in New Yorks violent crime statistics?)Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikkey 0 #78 April 19, 2004 Quote"PEOPLE living in England and Wales are at greater risk of falling victim to crime than citizens of most other industrialised nations, according to a study published yesterday. "The International Crime Victims Survey, based on 34,000 telephone interviews across 17 countries, found that 26 per cent of people - more than one in four - in England and Wales had been victims of crime in 1999. The figure for Scotland was 23 per cent and in Northern Ireland 15 per cent." Telephone interviews in 17 countries? So how many in each exactly – how were respondents chosen? In which areas of the countries, which demographics and which crimes? Are “crimes” like the scratching of your car or shoplifting been included? The result that Northern Ireland would be safest place in the UK, probably tells you something about the credibility of the study. It is difficult enough to compare official crime stats as it is (due to different definitions of crime, differences in the legal system and differences in data collection) – this does not seem to have any credibility what so ever. You have to do better then this John. On another point, I notice the “outrage” from the Americans here. How many cameras in urban areas in the US? What about privacy in regard to your personal information post “Patriots”? I think the increase in “surveillance” of the public is a wide spread phenomenon in the western world – not just in the UK.--------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
damion75 0 #79 April 19, 2004 Quote'If you want to have a go at an aspect of the UK which we would probably agree with you on, then have ago at our draconian traffic laws... most Brits hate them!! ' Don't forget the licencing hours legislation Frank True - I think we should have a Coup - the drinkers coup!! DOWN WITH LICENCING HOURS!!!! Of course having used the words 'arsehole' and 'Blair' in the same sentence I am probably on an MI5 database now...!*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
damion75 0 #80 April 19, 2004 QuoteQuote "At this rate, we will soon be strapping a camera on everyone's shoulder," says Mark Littlewood, campaign director for Liberty, a London-based human rights group. I don't want to be Mr. Cynical, but there are a lot of wet liberals in the English middle classes (yes, specifically English) who will be against anything! They never seem to actually have a workable solution though... These are the same type of people who have stopped British schools from celebrating xmas in order not to offend muslim / hindu kids. I am surprised to find a right winger (am I right?) like yourself quoting / agreeing with them. Quote...critics warn that CCTV poses a threat to the innocent. Tapes from surveillance cameras, which are usually kept for a month before being erased, often find their way into the wrong hands. Clips of people driving badly or behaving foolishly are a staple on British TV. You want to ruin the comedy on our TV? Programmes like these just might save lives - have you taken that into consideration? Quote The invasion of privacy sometimes ruins lives. In Manchester, a TV show broadcast a CCTV still of a man accused of using a stolen bank card. It later turned out that the camera operator had submitted the wrong photo, but the apology came too late. The man lost his job and eventually suffered a nervous breakdown. One off - I feel sorry for him but you can't base policy on one case. QuoteStudies have also shown that CCTV operators are not always as benign as the public might hope. Stores have used surveillance technology to analyze customers' buying habits or to remove teenage boys and other "undesirables" from the premises, even if they had done nothing wrong. UK shops reserve the right not to serve people that they don't want to anyway. Surely you would not want to take away the rights of the shopkeeper? Quote ...Civil liberties groups warn that when everyone is watching everyone else, trust breaks down. We do not (in general) have such a culture of privacy in Britain as you seem to in the US. Just look at the cult of candid camera TV shows which feature on UK TV and are very popular. And actually, while I have carefully avoided Northern Ireland (a different issue), it does bring out another point: CCTV is one more tool in the war against terrorists. This is a battle which has been ongoing on NI and on mainland Britain for 30+ years and we have therefore equipped ourselves to fight it. The British public have made their views on the balance of freedom and privacy against security known at the ballot box time and again in that period. It appears that in the US the balance is different at the moment, but if more attacks (god forbid) happen there then perhaps the balance will shift there too.*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peacefuljeffrey 0 #81 April 19, 2004 QuoteThat's why we declared, fought for, and gained our independence from England.......Bong!....... Don't forget that we also went back there to keep their asses from coming under Nazi rule... and now they impose police-statism on themselves and then tell us here how much they lurrrrrve it! What a fuckin' world. --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites damion75 0 #82 April 19, 2004 QuoteDon't forget that we also went back there to keep their asses from coming under Nazi rule... So off topic that it is risible... Its a pity that you guys could only afford canoes and rowing boats to get over here then? I mean surely thats the only reason you took three years to get to Britain? You were just lucky that we left you something to do...*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mikkey 0 #83 April 19, 2004 Quotenow they impose police-statism on themselves How do the legal rights and privacy laws in the UK compare to the US post Patriot Act? If you look at the size of the US intelligence organisations and the technology available - how do you know that you are not much more "watched" in the US then in the UK?--------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Skyrad 0 #84 April 19, 2004 Yea, and we have eight CCTV cameras on every double decker bus in London, and we can be tracker by our oyster cards thoughout our nations capital individualy. The biggest problem is theres not enough camera operatorsWhen an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #85 April 19, 2004 QuoteHow do the legal rights and privacy laws in the UK compare to the US post Patriot Act? If you look at the size of the US intelligence organisations and the technology available - UK laws look like garbage in any fair comparison. US intelligence organizations are busy looking outside the country, and at outside threats that have gotten in. Courts have ruled against use of extraordinary technology used without a warrant. Quotehow do you know that you are not much more "watched" in the US then in the UK? Well, it might have something to do with the fact that we don't have cameras on every corner.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #86 April 19, 2004 QuoteIts a pity that you guys could only afford canoes and rowing boats to get over here then? I mean surely thats the only reason you took three years to get to Britain? Riiiiight, no possibility that the US public didn't want to fight a foreign war. FDR may have been chomping at the bit to jump in bed with Churchill and Stalin, but most of the country was no interested until we were attacked. QuoteYou were just lucky that we left you something to do... Yeah, you were doing so well without us. How do you think you would have done without the US selling you the instruments of war? Oh, and I really appreciate you having my grandfather's rifle melted down rather than returning it to it's rightful owner. See if I ever send you something to help.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,465 #87 April 19, 2004 QuoteCourts have ruled against use of extraordinary technology used without a warrant. and I am sure it doesn't happen because that is what the courts have decided. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #88 April 19, 2004 QuoteI am surprised to find a right winger (am I right?) like yourself quoting / agreeing with them. On abortion, I'm pro-choice (up to a point). And I'm against prayer in public schools. How do those positions fit into your attempt to brand me a "right-winger"? I'm pro-freedom. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites damion75 0 #89 April 20, 2004 QuoteUS intelligence organizations are busy looking outside the country, and at outside threats that have gotten in. At what point exactly did you work for the CIA? Or any of the other numerous agencies at large? I certainly wouldn't like to make such sweeping statements about what national intelligence / counter intelligence agencies are up to...*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #90 April 20, 2004 You know how you have MI-5 and MI-6? Different areas of operation, different tasks, etc. Well, CIA is tasked with external operations, and the FBI is tasked with internal (US soil) operations. Obviously, it's not that clear cut, and there are a few dozen other agencies (DIA, NRO, NSA, et al), but very few if any, are given blanket authorization to work at home and abroad. Most, if not all, have been specifically instructed not to cross that boundary, and not to collaborate with the other half. This is changing post 9/11, but still in effect. Now I couldn't tell you the agencies aren't breaking those mandates, but I don't believe they're doing it on a large scale. They are after all being very closely watched (part or the restructuring and all). Have you got anything to contradict me other than the fact that you 'wouldn't like to make my statements?'witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Erroll 80 #91 April 20, 2004 Quote They are after all being very closely watched A certain irony in that statement, given the original topic and the subsequent debate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #92 April 21, 2004 QuoteWell, CIA is tasked with external operations, and the FBI is tasked with internal (US soil) operations. Obviously, it's not that clear cut, and there are a few dozen other agencies (DIA, NRO, NSA, et al), but very few if any, are given blanket authorization to work at home and abroad. Most, if not all, have been specifically instructed not to cross that boundary, and not to collaborate with the other half. This is changing post 9/11, but still in effect. Exactly! This is why much pre- 9/11 intelligence info from the CIA wasn't shared with the FBI, and why we couldn't do as much as possible to stop the attacks. The law forbid the sharing of that info. The much-maligned Patriot Act knocked down that information-sharing wall, and now allows these agencies to share and compare info, so that we can do a better job in future of stopping foreign terrorists who have already infiltrated our country. And some people want to do away with the Patriot Act... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites damion75 0 #93 April 21, 2004 QuoteQuoteYou know how you have MI-5 and MI-6? Different areas of operation, different tasks, etc. Well, CIA is tasked with external operations, and the FBI is tasked with internal (US soil) operations. I am aware of it... Quote Most, if not all, have been specifically instructed not to cross that boundary, and not to collaborate with the other half. This is changing post 9/11, but still in effect. I agree with JohnRich's post about this - which would probably have been equally true if related to MI5 and MI6. Why can't they all just get along?! Quote Now I couldn't tell you the agencies aren't breaking those mandates, but I don't believe they're doing it on a large scale. They are after all being very closely watched (part or the restructuring and all). Have you got anything to contradict me other than the fact that you 'wouldn't like to make my statements?' No contradiction necessary - you have made my point above. (my emphasis) I agree that it is unlikely that they are doing it on a very large scale, but it seems unrealistic to suggest that they are not doing it at all... Of course if we remove the legislation which allows them to get away with it we would also tie their hands when it comes to preventing terrorism...*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zoter 0 #94 April 21, 2004 The Brits' want to have the last word is only matched in its 'enthusiasm' ...by the US's eagerness to respond... What a couple of strange bedfellows we are... Keep it on topic chaps ...its interesting, but lets leave the insults and retorts about the wars out...thats a bit disrespectful to people on both sides of the pond who did what they had to do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #95 April 21, 2004 QuoteTelephone interviews in 17 countries? So how many in each exactly – how were respondents chosen? In which areas of the countries, which demographics and which crimes? Are “crimes” like the scratching of your car or shoplifting been included?... ...this does not seem to have any credibility what so ever. You have to do better then this John. It's interesting that you ask all those questions as if you are interested in gauging the scientific merits of this study... But then even though you don't have any of the answers, you go ahead and decide anyway that it doesn't have any credibility. So much for your standard of scientific proof. I guess you judge the merits of things based solely upon whether or not the conclusion matches your personal beliefs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zoter 0 #96 April 21, 2004 QuoteI guess you judge the merits of things based solely upon whether or not the conclusion matches your personal beliefs. Unfortunately John.....most people do judge the merits on the premise you have outlined.....its not ideal, its just human nature Its a utopian view to think the majority think otherwise. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 4 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
peacefuljeffrey 0 #81 April 19, 2004 QuoteThat's why we declared, fought for, and gained our independence from England.......Bong!....... Don't forget that we also went back there to keep their asses from coming under Nazi rule... and now they impose police-statism on themselves and then tell us here how much they lurrrrrve it! What a fuckin' world. --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
damion75 0 #82 April 19, 2004 QuoteDon't forget that we also went back there to keep their asses from coming under Nazi rule... So off topic that it is risible... Its a pity that you guys could only afford canoes and rowing boats to get over here then? I mean surely thats the only reason you took three years to get to Britain? You were just lucky that we left you something to do...*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikkey 0 #83 April 19, 2004 Quotenow they impose police-statism on themselves How do the legal rights and privacy laws in the UK compare to the US post Patriot Act? If you look at the size of the US intelligence organisations and the technology available - how do you know that you are not much more "watched" in the US then in the UK?--------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #84 April 19, 2004 Yea, and we have eight CCTV cameras on every double decker bus in London, and we can be tracker by our oyster cards thoughout our nations capital individualy. The biggest problem is theres not enough camera operatorsWhen an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #85 April 19, 2004 QuoteHow do the legal rights and privacy laws in the UK compare to the US post Patriot Act? If you look at the size of the US intelligence organisations and the technology available - UK laws look like garbage in any fair comparison. US intelligence organizations are busy looking outside the country, and at outside threats that have gotten in. Courts have ruled against use of extraordinary technology used without a warrant. Quotehow do you know that you are not much more "watched" in the US then in the UK? Well, it might have something to do with the fact that we don't have cameras on every corner.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #86 April 19, 2004 QuoteIts a pity that you guys could only afford canoes and rowing boats to get over here then? I mean surely thats the only reason you took three years to get to Britain? Riiiiight, no possibility that the US public didn't want to fight a foreign war. FDR may have been chomping at the bit to jump in bed with Churchill and Stalin, but most of the country was no interested until we were attacked. QuoteYou were just lucky that we left you something to do... Yeah, you were doing so well without us. How do you think you would have done without the US selling you the instruments of war? Oh, and I really appreciate you having my grandfather's rifle melted down rather than returning it to it's rightful owner. See if I ever send you something to help.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #87 April 19, 2004 QuoteCourts have ruled against use of extraordinary technology used without a warrant. and I am sure it doesn't happen because that is what the courts have decided. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #88 April 19, 2004 QuoteI am surprised to find a right winger (am I right?) like yourself quoting / agreeing with them. On abortion, I'm pro-choice (up to a point). And I'm against prayer in public schools. How do those positions fit into your attempt to brand me a "right-winger"? I'm pro-freedom. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
damion75 0 #89 April 20, 2004 QuoteUS intelligence organizations are busy looking outside the country, and at outside threats that have gotten in. At what point exactly did you work for the CIA? Or any of the other numerous agencies at large? I certainly wouldn't like to make such sweeping statements about what national intelligence / counter intelligence agencies are up to...*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #90 April 20, 2004 You know how you have MI-5 and MI-6? Different areas of operation, different tasks, etc. Well, CIA is tasked with external operations, and the FBI is tasked with internal (US soil) operations. Obviously, it's not that clear cut, and there are a few dozen other agencies (DIA, NRO, NSA, et al), but very few if any, are given blanket authorization to work at home and abroad. Most, if not all, have been specifically instructed not to cross that boundary, and not to collaborate with the other half. This is changing post 9/11, but still in effect. Now I couldn't tell you the agencies aren't breaking those mandates, but I don't believe they're doing it on a large scale. They are after all being very closely watched (part or the restructuring and all). Have you got anything to contradict me other than the fact that you 'wouldn't like to make my statements?'witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Erroll 80 #91 April 20, 2004 Quote They are after all being very closely watched A certain irony in that statement, given the original topic and the subsequent debate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #92 April 21, 2004 QuoteWell, CIA is tasked with external operations, and the FBI is tasked with internal (US soil) operations. Obviously, it's not that clear cut, and there are a few dozen other agencies (DIA, NRO, NSA, et al), but very few if any, are given blanket authorization to work at home and abroad. Most, if not all, have been specifically instructed not to cross that boundary, and not to collaborate with the other half. This is changing post 9/11, but still in effect. Exactly! This is why much pre- 9/11 intelligence info from the CIA wasn't shared with the FBI, and why we couldn't do as much as possible to stop the attacks. The law forbid the sharing of that info. The much-maligned Patriot Act knocked down that information-sharing wall, and now allows these agencies to share and compare info, so that we can do a better job in future of stopping foreign terrorists who have already infiltrated our country. And some people want to do away with the Patriot Act... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
damion75 0 #93 April 21, 2004 QuoteQuoteYou know how you have MI-5 and MI-6? Different areas of operation, different tasks, etc. Well, CIA is tasked with external operations, and the FBI is tasked with internal (US soil) operations. I am aware of it... Quote Most, if not all, have been specifically instructed not to cross that boundary, and not to collaborate with the other half. This is changing post 9/11, but still in effect. I agree with JohnRich's post about this - which would probably have been equally true if related to MI5 and MI6. Why can't they all just get along?! Quote Now I couldn't tell you the agencies aren't breaking those mandates, but I don't believe they're doing it on a large scale. They are after all being very closely watched (part or the restructuring and all). Have you got anything to contradict me other than the fact that you 'wouldn't like to make my statements?' No contradiction necessary - you have made my point above. (my emphasis) I agree that it is unlikely that they are doing it on a very large scale, but it seems unrealistic to suggest that they are not doing it at all... Of course if we remove the legislation which allows them to get away with it we would also tie their hands when it comes to preventing terrorism...*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zoter 0 #94 April 21, 2004 The Brits' want to have the last word is only matched in its 'enthusiasm' ...by the US's eagerness to respond... What a couple of strange bedfellows we are... Keep it on topic chaps ...its interesting, but lets leave the insults and retorts about the wars out...thats a bit disrespectful to people on both sides of the pond who did what they had to do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #95 April 21, 2004 QuoteTelephone interviews in 17 countries? So how many in each exactly – how were respondents chosen? In which areas of the countries, which demographics and which crimes? Are “crimes” like the scratching of your car or shoplifting been included?... ...this does not seem to have any credibility what so ever. You have to do better then this John. It's interesting that you ask all those questions as if you are interested in gauging the scientific merits of this study... But then even though you don't have any of the answers, you go ahead and decide anyway that it doesn't have any credibility. So much for your standard of scientific proof. I guess you judge the merits of things based solely upon whether or not the conclusion matches your personal beliefs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zoter 0 #96 April 21, 2004 QuoteI guess you judge the merits of things based solely upon whether or not the conclusion matches your personal beliefs. Unfortunately John.....most people do judge the merits on the premise you have outlined.....its not ideal, its just human nature Its a utopian view to think the majority think otherwise. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 4 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Zoter 0 #94 April 21, 2004 The Brits' want to have the last word is only matched in its 'enthusiasm' ...by the US's eagerness to respond... What a couple of strange bedfellows we are... Keep it on topic chaps ...its interesting, but lets leave the insults and retorts about the wars out...thats a bit disrespectful to people on both sides of the pond who did what they had to do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #95 April 21, 2004 QuoteTelephone interviews in 17 countries? So how many in each exactly – how were respondents chosen? In which areas of the countries, which demographics and which crimes? Are “crimes” like the scratching of your car or shoplifting been included?... ...this does not seem to have any credibility what so ever. You have to do better then this John. It's interesting that you ask all those questions as if you are interested in gauging the scientific merits of this study... But then even though you don't have any of the answers, you go ahead and decide anyway that it doesn't have any credibility. So much for your standard of scientific proof. I guess you judge the merits of things based solely upon whether or not the conclusion matches your personal beliefs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zoter 0 #96 April 21, 2004 QuoteI guess you judge the merits of things based solely upon whether or not the conclusion matches your personal beliefs. Unfortunately John.....most people do judge the merits on the premise you have outlined.....its not ideal, its just human nature Its a utopian view to think the majority think otherwise. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 4 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
JohnRich 4 #95 April 21, 2004 QuoteTelephone interviews in 17 countries? So how many in each exactly – how were respondents chosen? In which areas of the countries, which demographics and which crimes? Are “crimes” like the scratching of your car or shoplifting been included?... ...this does not seem to have any credibility what so ever. You have to do better then this John. It's interesting that you ask all those questions as if you are interested in gauging the scientific merits of this study... But then even though you don't have any of the answers, you go ahead and decide anyway that it doesn't have any credibility. So much for your standard of scientific proof. I guess you judge the merits of things based solely upon whether or not the conclusion matches your personal beliefs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zoter 0 #96 April 21, 2004 QuoteI guess you judge the merits of things based solely upon whether or not the conclusion matches your personal beliefs. Unfortunately John.....most people do judge the merits on the premise you have outlined.....its not ideal, its just human nature Its a utopian view to think the majority think otherwise. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
