On 6/24/15 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:50:29 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 11:25 AM, wrote:

Your reading comprehension skills are failing you again. I simply
pointed out using extremely small sample sizes will return strange
results.
Do you look at every black person as being 14 times more likely to
kill you than a white person? That is what the statistics say
If you were black, looking at other black people, the ratio is even
worse.
.
Your statistic about 48 people killed in 14 years gets lost in the
noise of ~165,000 murders.


My reading comprehension skills are fine. We don't need a statistical
analysis to show that there are more right-wing white boys committing
acts of terror, such as last week's in Charleston, than there are
Muslims committing similar acts. The results aren't strange. The
Southern Poverty Law Center keeps track of violent right-wing groups.
There are hundreds and hundreds of them in this country, with really
itchy trigger fingers. Your boys, on your side of the political fence.

The general murder stats in this country are horrific, no question about
it, but that wasn't what I was discussion. You are more than welcome to
start a thread about that so that your boys here can chime in.


When you are citing murder statistics,to make your case, how are
murder statistics insignificant?

If you are willing to remember my first thoughts on this killing, I
suggested that they should consider this terrorism. Then they might be
willing to expend a fraction of the money we are spending on the
Jihadists to investigate the aryans.

Oh, and if I need help with statistics, I'll ask my wife, who took a
number of grad level stats courses and a number of Ph.D. level stats
courses. No need to consult an amateur, eh?

Maybe you should get some help.
I didn't "study" statistics, I was in the business of actually
analysing them and learning how to query databases.
Actual experience beats a sterile education environment every time.
IBM trusted me enough to base million dollar decisions on the
conclusions I generated.


I was not citing murder statistics, just a count of incidents.
Statistics as I am sure you know, involves much more than a simple count.

Wow. You could query a database. BFD. The "study" of statistics includes
analysis and queries.

On 6/24/2015 2:40 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/24/15 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:50:29 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 11:25 AM, wrote:

Your reading comprehension skills are failing you again. I simply
pointed out using extremely small sample sizes will return strange
results.
Do you look at every black person as being 14 times more likely to
kill you than a white person? That is what the statistics say
If you were black, looking at other black people, the ratio is even
worse.
.
Your statistic about 48 people killed in 14 years gets lost in the
noise of ~165,000 murders.


My reading comprehension skills are fine. We don't need a statistical
analysis to show that there are more right-wing white boys committing
acts of terror, such as last week's in Charleston, than there are
Muslims committing similar acts. The results aren't strange. The
Southern Poverty Law Center keeps track of violent right-wing groups.
There are hundreds and hundreds of them in this country, with really
itchy trigger fingers. Your boys, on your side of the political fence.

The general murder stats in this country are horrific, no question about
it, but that wasn't what I was discussion. You are more than welcome to
start a thread about that so that your boys here can chime in.


When you are citing murder statistics,to make your case, how are
murder statistics insignificant?

If you are willing to remember my first thoughts on this killing, I
suggested that they should consider this terrorism. Then they might be
willing to expend a fraction of the money we are spending on the
Jihadists to investigate the aryans.

Oh, and if I need help with statistics, I'll ask my wife, who took a
number of grad level stats courses and a number of Ph.D. level stats
courses. No need to consult an amateur, eh?

Maybe you should get some help.
I didn't "study" statistics, I was in the business of actually
analysing them and learning how to query databases.
Actual experience beats a sterile education environment every time.
IBM trusted me enough to base million dollar decisions on the
conclusions I generated.


I was not citing murder statistics, just a count of incidents.
Statistics as I am sure you know, involves much more than a simple count.

Wow. You could query a database. BFD. The "study" of statistics includes
analysis and queries.
And????? What else?????

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."

On Wednesday, June 24, 2015 at 2:59:56 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:40:07 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:50:29 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 11:25 AM, wrote:

Your reading comprehension skills are failing you again. I simply
pointed out using extremely small sample sizes will return strange
results.
Do you look at every black person as being 14 times more likely to
kill you than a white person? That is what the statistics say
If you were black, looking at other black people, the ratio is even
worse.
.
Your statistic about 48 people killed in 14 years gets lost in the
noise of ~165,000 murders.


My reading comprehension skills are fine. We don't need a statistical
analysis to show that there are more right-wing white boys committing
acts of terror, such as last week's in Charleston, than there are
Muslims committing similar acts. The results aren't strange. The
Southern Poverty Law Center keeps track of violent right-wing groups.
There are hundreds and hundreds of them in this country, with really
itchy trigger fingers. Your boys, on your side of the political fence..

The general murder stats in this country are horrific, no question about
it, but that wasn't what I was discussion. You are more than welcome to
start a thread about that so that your boys here can chime in.


When you are citing murder statistics,to make your case, how are
murder statistics insignificant?

If you are willing to remember my first thoughts on this killing, I
suggested that they should consider this terrorism. Then they might be
willing to expend a fraction of the money we are spending on the
Jihadists to investigate the aryans.

Oh, and if I need help with statistics, I'll ask my wife, who took a
number of grad level stats courses and a number of Ph.D. level stats
courses. No need to consult an amateur, eh?

Maybe you should get some help.
I didn't "study" statistics, I was in the business of actually
analysing them and learning how to query databases.
Actual experience beats a sterile education environment every time.
IBM trusted me enough to base million dollar decisions on the
conclusions I generated.


I was not citing murder statistics, just a count of incidents.
Statistics as I am sure you know, involves much more than a simple count..

Wow. You could query a database. BFD. The "study" of statistics includes
analysis and queries.

If basing your conclusion on 48 data points in a 170,000 record field
is "analysis" you don't understand statistics either.

Somebody started with a conclusion, then sought out some random
numbers to "prove it", AKA a "study".

Sounds like the current crop of climate "studies". Except their numbers are admittedly fudged.

On 6/24/15 2:59 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:40:07 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:50:29 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 11:25 AM, wrote:

Your reading comprehension skills are failing you again. I simply
pointed out using extremely small sample sizes will return strange
results.
Do you look at every black person as being 14 times more likely to
kill you than a white person? That is what the statistics say
If you were black, looking at other black people, the ratio is even
worse.
.
Your statistic about 48 people killed in 14 years gets lost in the
noise of ~165,000 murders.


My reading comprehension skills are fine. We don't need a statistical
analysis to show that there are more right-wing white boys committing
acts of terror, such as last week's in Charleston, than there are
Muslims committing similar acts. The results aren't strange. The
Southern Poverty Law Center keeps track of violent right-wing groups.
There are hundreds and hundreds of them in this country, with really
itchy trigger fingers. Your boys, on your side of the political fence.

The general murder stats in this country are horrific, no question about
it, but that wasn't what I was discussion. You are more than welcome to
start a thread about that so that your boys here can chime in.


When you are citing murder statistics,to make your case, how are
murder statistics insignificant?

If you are willing to remember my first thoughts on this killing, I
suggested that they should consider this terrorism. Then they might be
willing to expend a fraction of the money we are spending on the
Jihadists to investigate the aryans.

Oh, and if I need help with statistics, I'll ask my wife, who took a
number of grad level stats courses and a number of Ph.D. level stats
courses. No need to consult an amateur, eh?

Maybe you should get some help.
I didn't "study" statistics, I was in the business of actually
analysing them and learning how to query databases.
Actual experience beats a sterile education environment every time.
IBM trusted me enough to base million dollar decisions on the
conclusions I generated.


I was not citing murder statistics, just a count of incidents.
Statistics as I am sure you know, involves much more than a simple count.

Wow. You could query a database. BFD. The "study" of statistics includes
analysis and queries.

If basing your conclusion on 48 data points in a 170,000 record field
is "analysis" you don't understand statistics either.

Somebody started with a conclusion, then sought out some random
numbers to "prove it", AKA a "study".



My "conclusion" is that there have been more of these terrorist type
attack killings in this country since 9-11 that have been perpetrated by
right-wing white guys than by Muslims. I know how painful it is for you
righties to argue with these simple numbers, and with the far more
complex numbers and actual statistics connected with things like
"climate change" and such.

On Wednesday, June 24, 2015 at 2:59:56 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:40:07 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:50:29 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 11:25 AM, wrote:

Your reading comprehension skills are failing you again. I simply
pointed out using extremely small sample sizes will return strange
results.
Do you look at every black person as being 14 times more likely to
kill you than a white person? That is what the statistics say
If you were black, looking at other black people, the ratio is even
worse.
.
Your statistic about 48 people killed in 14 years gets lost in the
noise of ~165,000 murders.


My reading comprehension skills are fine. We don't need a statistical
analysis to show that there are more right-wing white boys committing
acts of terror, such as last week's in Charleston, than there are
Muslims committing similar acts. The results aren't strange. The
Southern Poverty Law Center keeps track of violent right-wing groups.
There are hundreds and hundreds of them in this country, with really
itchy trigger fingers. Your boys, on your side of the political fence..

The general murder stats in this country are horrific, no question about
it, but that wasn't what I was discussion. You are more than welcome to
start a thread about that so that your boys here can chime in.


When you are citing murder statistics,to make your case, how are
murder statistics insignificant?

If you are willing to remember my first thoughts on this killing, I
suggested that they should consider this terrorism. Then they might be
willing to expend a fraction of the money we are spending on the
Jihadists to investigate the aryans.

Oh, and if I need help with statistics, I'll ask my wife, who took a
number of grad level stats courses and a number of Ph.D. level stats
courses. No need to consult an amateur, eh?

Maybe you should get some help.
I didn't "study" statistics, I was in the business of actually
analysing them and learning how to query databases.
Actual experience beats a sterile education environment every time.
IBM trusted me enough to base million dollar decisions on the
conclusions I generated.


I was not citing murder statistics, just a count of incidents.
Statistics as I am sure you know, involves much more than a simple count..

Wow. You could query a database. BFD. The "study" of statistics includes
analysis and queries.

If basing your conclusion on 48 data points in a 170,000 record field
is "analysis" you don't understand statistics either.

Those 48 deaths pale in comparison to the thousands of deaths cause by left-wing, inner-city drug gangs. They are certainly the biggest threat to life in these United States.

On 6/24/15 11:17 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:45:33 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 2:59 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:40:07 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:50:29 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 11:25 AM, wrote:

Your reading comprehension skills are failing you again. I simply
pointed out using extremely small sample sizes will return strange
results.
Do you look at every black person as being 14 times more likely to
kill you than a white person? That is what the statistics say
If you were black, looking at other black people, the ratio is even
worse.
.
Your statistic about 48 people killed in 14 years gets lost in the
noise of ~165,000 murders.


My reading comprehension skills are fine. We don't need a statistical
analysis to show that there are more right-wing white boys committing
acts of terror, such as last week's in Charleston, than there are
Muslims committing similar acts. The results aren't strange. The
Southern Poverty Law Center keeps track of violent right-wing groups.
There are hundreds and hundreds of them in this country, with really
itchy trigger fingers. Your boys, on your side of the political fence.

The general murder stats in this country are horrific, no question about
it, but that wasn't what I was discussion. You are more than welcome to
start a thread about that so that your boys here can chime in.


When you are citing murder statistics,to make your case, how are
murder statistics insignificant?

If you are willing to remember my first thoughts on this killing, I
suggested that they should consider this terrorism. Then they might be
willing to expend a fraction of the money we are spending on the
Jihadists to investigate the aryans.

Oh, and if I need help with statistics, I'll ask my wife, who took a
number of grad level stats courses and a number of Ph.D. level stats
courses. No need to consult an amateur, eh?

Maybe you should get some help.
I didn't "study" statistics, I was in the business of actually
analysing them and learning how to query databases.
Actual experience beats a sterile education environment every time.
IBM trusted me enough to base million dollar decisions on the
conclusions I generated.


I was not citing murder statistics, just a count of incidents.
Statistics as I am sure you know, involves much more than a simple count.

Wow. You could query a database. BFD. The "study" of statistics includes
analysis and queries.

If basing your conclusion on 48 data points in a 170,000 record field
is "analysis" you don't understand statistics either.

Somebody started with a conclusion, then sought out some random
numbers to "prove it", AKA a "study".



My "conclusion" is that there have been more of these terrorist type
attack killings in this country since 9-11 that have been perpetrated by
right-wing white guys than by Muslims. I know how painful it is for you
righties to argue with these simple numbers, and with the far more
complex numbers and actual statistics connected with things like
"climate change" and such.

That is true if you don't think drug gangs are terrorist
organizations.
II already admitted Charleston was a terror attack and should be
treated that way. What do you want from me?



You're walking a fine line here. Defining "terrorism" as it is
perpetrated in the United States isn't easy, but usually it means the
killing of "innocent" civilians in order to terrorize and possibly
control that population. While the drug gangs are engaged in a wide
variety of activities, most of their killing here seems to involve
others involved in the drug trade and other illegal activities - hardly
innocents.

On 6/25/2015 6:19 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/24/15 11:17 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:45:33 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 2:59 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:40:07 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:50:29 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 11:25 AM, wrote:

Your reading comprehension skills are failing you again. I simply
pointed out using extremely small sample sizes will return strange
results.
Do you look at every black person as being 14 times more likely to
kill you than a white person? That is what the statistics say
If you were black, looking at other black people, the ratio is even
worse.
.
Your statistic about 48 people killed in 14 years gets lost in the
noise of ~165,000 murders.


My reading comprehension skills are fine. We don't need a
statistical
analysis to show that there are more right-wing white boys
committing
acts of terror, such as last week's in Charleston, than there are
Muslims committing similar acts. The results aren't strange. The
Southern Poverty Law Center keeps track of violent right-wing
groups.
There are hundreds and hundreds of them in this country, with really
itchy trigger fingers. Your boys, on your side of the political
fence.

The general murder stats in this country are horrific, no
question about
it, but that wasn't what I was discussion. You are more than
welcome to
start a thread about that so that your boys here can chime in.


When you are citing murder statistics,to make your case, how are
murder statistics insignificant?

If you are willing to remember my first thoughts on this killing, I
suggested that they should consider this terrorism. Then they
might be
willing to expend a fraction of the money we are spending on the
Jihadists to investigate the aryans.

Oh, and if I need help with statistics, I'll ask my wife, who took a
number of grad level stats courses and a number of Ph.D. level stats
courses. No need to consult an amateur, eh?

Maybe you should get some help.
I didn't "study" statistics, I was in the business of actually
analysing them and learning how to query databases.
Actual experience beats a sterile education environment every time.
IBM trusted me enough to base million dollar decisions on the
conclusions I generated.


I was not citing murder statistics, just a count of incidents.
Statistics as I am sure you know, involves much more than a simple
count.

Wow. You could query a database. BFD. The "study" of statistics
includes
analysis and queries.

If basing your conclusion on 48 data points in a 170,000 record field
is "analysis" you don't understand statistics either.

Somebody started with a conclusion, then sought out some random
numbers to "prove it", AKA a "study".



My "conclusion" is that there have been more of these terrorist type
attack killings in this country since 9-11 that have been perpetrated by
right-wing white guys than by Muslims. I know how painful it is for you
righties to argue with these simple numbers, and with the far more
complex numbers and actual statistics connected with things like
"climate change" and such.

That is true if you don't think drug gangs are terrorist
organizations.
II already admitted Charleston was a terror attack and should be
treated that way. What do you want from me?



You're walking a fine line here. Defining "terrorism" as it is
perpetrated in the United States isn't easy, but usually it means the
killing of "innocent" civilians in order to terrorize and possibly
control that population. While the drug gangs are engaged in a wide
variety of activities, most of their killing here seems to involve
others involved in the drug trade and other illegal activities - hardly
innocents.

Anyone who relies on your assessment of anything ought to have his head
examined. (Don, you there?)

Here is a more reasonable definition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domest..._United_States



--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."

On Wednesday, June 24, 2015 at 11:18:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:45:33 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 2:59 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:40:07 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:50:29 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/24/15 11:25 AM, wrote:

Your reading comprehension skills are failing you again. I simply
pointed out using extremely small sample sizes will return strange
results.
Do you look at every black person as being 14 times more likely to
kill you than a white person? That is what the statistics say
If you were black, looking at other black people, the ratio is even
worse.
.
Your statistic about 48 people killed in 14 years gets lost in the
noise of ~165,000 murders.


My reading comprehension skills are fine. We don't need a statistical
analysis to show that there are more right-wing white boys committing
acts of terror, such as last week's in Charleston, than there are
Muslims committing similar acts. The results aren't strange. The
Southern Poverty Law Center keeps track of violent right-wing groups.
There are hundreds and hundreds of them in this country, with really
itchy trigger fingers. Your boys, on your side of the political fence.

The general murder stats in this country are horrific, no question about
it, but that wasn't what I was discussion. You are more than welcome to
start a thread about that so that your boys here can chime in.


When you are citing murder statistics,to make your case, how are
murder statistics insignificant?

If you are willing to remember my first thoughts on this killing, I
suggested that they should consider this terrorism. Then they might be
willing to expend a fraction of the money we are spending on the
Jihadists to investigate the aryans.

Oh, and if I need help with statistics, I'll ask my wife, who took a
number of grad level stats courses and a number of Ph.D. level stats
courses. No need to consult an amateur, eh?

Maybe you should get some help.
I didn't "study" statistics, I was in the business of actually
analysing them and learning how to query databases.
Actual experience beats a sterile education environment every time.
IBM trusted me enough to base million dollar decisions on the
conclusions I generated.


I was not citing murder statistics, just a count of incidents.
Statistics as I am sure you know, involves much more than a simple count.

Wow. You could query a database. BFD. The "study" of statistics includes
analysis and queries.

If basing your conclusion on 48 data points in a 170,000 record field
is "analysis" you don't understand statistics either.

Somebody started with a conclusion, then sought out some random
numbers to "prove it", AKA a "study".



My "conclusion" is that there have been more of these terrorist type
attack killings in this country since 9-11 that have been perpetrated by
right-wing white guys than by Muslims. I know how painful it is for you
righties to argue with these simple numbers, and with the far more
complex numbers and actual statistics connected with things like
"climate change" and such.

That is true if you don't think drug gangs are terrorist
organizations.
II already admitted Charleston was a terror attack and should be
treated that way. What do you want from me?

Do a little research on Dr. Kurzman and you'll find he's an apologist for Islam. The "findings" of his "study" aren't surprising, coming from him.