Fail Quotes

[MrBogosity]

No throat damage, and a verdict of 'homicide' is consistent with the 'choke hold' (which, according to this, didn't significantly injure him) being just too much for him to handle on top of everything else.

And now you're backpedalling even further. The coroner said that the choke hold is what killed him. Yes, other factors CONTRIBUTED to it, but THAT WASN'T WHAT YOU SAID SO STOP LYING! It was the choke hold, plus the compression on his chest, both caused by the police officers, that killed him.

Projecting much?  The video shows him trying to resist, after having stated he was going to resist.

Point out where or STFU.

Skipping the Argument from Authority Fallacy.

[R.E.H.W.R.]

From Shane's new feed.
https://www.facebook.com/shanedk/posts/10152611305383131?comment_id=10152611831673131&offset=0&total_comments=18&notif_t=share_reply

[MrBogosity]

Arrrgh.

Seems like every week now the Atheist Experience guys do ONE thing that's cringe-worthy. This week (12-21-14), Russell took on a caller about feminism and the patriarchy (and once again the caller was ill-equipped to deal with his bogosity). For example, Russell kept harping on about the fact that 20% of Senators were women.

Forgiving why he initially went with that particular statistic (and he did it a bit later with Fortune 500 CEOs specifically), remember the vital question in statistics: COMPARED TO WHAT???

Russell seems to think that all he has to do is compare this 20% to the ~50% of the population that women make up. The caller feebly tried to point out that 54% of voters were women, but Russell was having none of that.

The proper comparison, of course, is to how many female candidates voters were given the CHOICE of voting for: of all the people who registered and paid the filing fee for US Senate, who went to the primaries and thus represent the pool of people voters had to choose from, how many of THEM were women? If you don't know that, YOU DON'T KNOW SHIT! If 20% of that group are women, then OF COURSE 20% of Senators are going to be women!

You can always go and find the statistic that APPEARS to support whatever you want. There are PLENTY of professions where women are OVER-represented! If you don't ask the question of what is most appropriate to compare it to, you have no chance at getting at the truth. And if you're starting with your conclusion, it can be VERY difficult to listen to problems with your statistics.

[Travis Retriever]

Arrrgh.

Seems like every week now the Atheist Experience guys do ONE thing that's cringe-worthy. This week (12-21-14), Russell took on a caller about feminism and the patriarchy (and once again the caller was ill-equipped to deal with his bogosity). For example, Russell kept harping on about the fact that 20% of Senators were women.

Forgiving why he initially went with that particular statistic (and he did it a bit later with Fortune 500 CEOs specifically), remember the vital question in statistics: COMPARED TO WHAT???

Russell seems to think that all he has to do is compare this 20% to the ~50% of the population that women make up. The caller feebly tried to point out that 54% of voters were women, but Russell was having none of that.

The proper comparison, of course, is to how many female candidates voters were given the CHOICE of voting for: of all the people who registered and paid the filing fee for US Senate, who went to the primaries and thus represent the pool of people voters had to choose from, how many of THEM were women? If you don't know that, YOU DON'T KNOW SHIT! If 20% of that group are women, then OF COURSE 20% of Senators are going to be women!

You can always go and find the statistic that APPEARS to support whatever you want. There are PLENTY of professions where women are OVER-represented! If you don't ask the question of what is most appropriate to compare it to, you have no chance at getting at the truth. And if you're starting with your conclusion, it can be VERY difficult to listen to problems with your statistics.

While they no doubt spent their time self congratulating how they're better than the creationists and theists...that do the exact same thing with their pet gris-gris.  Oh, what a blind eye we turn when it's OUR pet bogosity being peddled, right?

[MrBogosity]

While they no doubt spent their time self congratulating how they're better than the creationists and theists...that do the exact same thing with their pet gris-gris.  Oh, what a blind eye we turn when it's OUR pet bogosity being peddled, right?

In this case, I can understand it more, since statistics is really difficult and it's so easy to engage in confirmation bias. But that's all the more reason we need to be on our skeptical toes when dealing with statistics.

[evensgrey]

In this case, I can understand it more, since statistics is really difficult and it's so easy to engage in confirmation bias. But that's all the more reason we need to be on our skeptical toes when dealing with statistics.

As an alien might observe, "Humans have a saying for EVERYTHING!"  The applicable saying here is, "Figures don't lie, but liars figure."

OK, so 20% of US Senators are women.  What does it MEAN that 20% of Us Senators are women is the important part.  If 20% of the CANDIDATES are women, then it may mean that the voters have no strong net preference one way or the other about the gender of the candidates.  If only 10% of candidates are women, then women may be being substantially preferred, and of 40% of candidates are women then women may be substantially disliked.  Of course, that doesn't follow without a great deal of further checking, as Canada can show quite well.  The NDP in particular has had a notorious practice of requiring half their candidates standing for election to be female.  They also have notoriously tended to put the female candidates forward preferentially in the Ridings where they do not expect to win.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5nnGCuCMAAGru8.png:large  Don't you love people who think they can get away with such blatant lies?

[MrBogosity]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5nnGCuCMAAGru8.png:large  Don't you love people who think they can get away with such blatant lies?

Plus, the irony of slinging hate-filled language at a group you deem to be full of haters.

[evensgrey]

Plus, the irony of slinging hate-filled language at a group you deem to be full of haters.

It's the funniest thing since RIAA (who shouldn't even have standing, since it doesn't own any copyrights itself) tried to sue somebody for more money than there was at the time.  (Given the massive volumes of currency being dumped into the banking system in the last few years is so many countries, there might be that much money now.)

[ArtemisVale]

[R.E.H.W.R.]

I hope they enjoy 30-30 caliber.

[Travis Retriever]

I hope they enjoy 30-30 caliber.

Or (knowing you) a longsword up the ass.

[R.E.H.W.R.]

Or (knowing you) a longsword up the ass.

With a twisting motion upon entry.

[Altimadark]

Chris Rock thanks Obama for Propaganda.

[ArtemisVale]

Chris Rock thanks Obama for Propaganda.

1. Wasn't that because of fracking?
2. Again, that was do to market interactions that happened in spite of what the president did
3. So the rate of spending was cut to slightly less? I'll give him that, whoop-de-shit
4. Redundant and refer to 2
5. Refer to 2 again
6. We have to buy insurance or else we'll get fined, that oughta stick it to those corporations
7. And how did that solve our terrorism problem?
8. Kudos I guess
9. Deporting people who are just looking for opportunities? Classy