-
“He's friendly, and doesn't bite....”
Yes. I’ve had many discussion with him. In person he comes across even better!
Marvin Shilmer
250,000 Jehovah's Witnesses have died refusing blood
by nicolaou 739 Replies latest watchtower medical
-
Marvin Shilmer
-
OnTheWayOut
First of all, many forget this important statistic: 69% of all statistics are simply made up.
Second, Barb A. summed this up on page 20 with saying there is no way to know. That backs up my first point.
Third, I may have missed it wading through 25 pages but nobody pointed out the sad irony of Cedars saying that instead of whining about it, someone should have asked that the potentially harmful information should be removed.
-
adamah
OTWO said-
First of all, many forget this important statistic: 69% of all statistics are simply made up.
Timely article ran in the Economist on ethics in science, pointing out the very-real problems, eg where researchers feel tempted to 'stretch' their claims to generate headlines:
(NOTE: I have no reason to doubt the validity of Beliaev's study, and there ARE cases where refusing a BT is tantamount to committing suicide; simply reporting the finding is OK, whereas extrapolating results as if one is a trained biostatician is "highly-irregular", to say the least.)
Adam
-
adamah
When I offered to give Marvin Believ's e-mail address just now, Marvin responded with:
Yes. I’ve had many discussion with him. In person he comes across even better!
You take the cake!
Back on page 9, I asked you this question, point-blank:
Just curious, Marvin: have you asked the authors of the study about their opinion of the validity of trying to apply the results of their study Worldwide, as you have? I'd be curious of their response.
Your response was your typical dismissive and curt response, where (paraphrased) you said you didn't need to, as you didn't think it was necessary to seek out his/their opinion on your extrapolation of the study data (maybe your response is back there, but I can't find it, as it seems to be missing: you either deleted it, or possibly it was deleted in Simon's thread clean-up he mentioned performing).
BUT NOW you admit you've had MANY prior discussions with Beliaev, even in person?
Marvin, I reached out to him a few days ago via e-mail SPECIFICALLY to seek out his opinion since you said you hadn't (I even said something to the effect that perhaps you'd listen to his opinion, coming "straight from the horse's mouth").
But NOW you admit that you've HAD many prior discussions with him IN PERSON? What were you discussing: the weather?
Is there something you needed to disclose a long time ago about your relationship with Beliaev?
Adam
-
Simon
maybe your response is back there, but I can't find it, as it seems to be missing: you either deleted it, or possibly it was deleted in Simon's thread clean-up he mentioned performing.
i only cleaned up the off-topic Cedars cabaret performance, nothing to do with the subject.
-
adamah
Simon said-
i only cleaned up the off-topic Cedars cabaret performance, nothing to do with the subject.
Thanks for the clarification.
Adam
-
cedars
Simon
i only cleaned up the off-topic Cedars cabaret performance, nothing to do with the subject.
Still moaning about me? That's a pity.
And are you referring to the part where I complained that it was wrong to be naming and shaming people through a JWN thread rather than going to the source and getting the problem resolved?
Yes, sorry for that "performance." Although well done for eventually yielding to common sense and getting the named-and-shamed-person's name removed from the thread title 20 pages later.
You obviously don't like doing the right thing when I'm the one telling you to do it, but I'm glad you eventually listened to someone.
I'm just glad I steered clear as much as I did. What point is it arguing with you anyway when anything I say that you don't like or that exposes you as being a bully gets removed, and I am childishly goaded even in my absense? As I said to begin with, the house always wins.
Cedars
[Edit post: I notice my plea for common sense on page 4 of this thread hasn't been deleted, so at least Simon hasn't completely re-written history. Probably people will now read it and wonder what on Earth I was complaining about because so much about this thread has since changed. It's just a sad irony that the "caberet" performance that Simon refers to was the product of him pouncing on me and scourning my calls for calm and reason to begin with. I should add that at least two (maybe more) posters who dared to agree with me over the course of this thread have since been banned. If that isn't evidence of Simon's despotic tendencies, I don't know what is.]
-
nicolaou
I complained that it was wrong to be naming and shaming people through a JWN thread rather than going to the source and getting the problem resolved
And I addressed your complaint six days ago (p7). I twice asked Julia to "back up" and "support" her assertion - she refused. This was the response I got her from her (gleaned from my smartphone cache).
Now then, for what it's worth, I have sent an apology to Julia. Not for ANY criticism I made of her tweet - it WAS stupid and irresponsible - but for falling below a standard of decency and using the phrase 'STUPID woman!' Whether or not I actually think that of her I do wish I hadn't punched out a reply tweet in quite so much haste.
I'm content to let Julia Barrick Douglas's track record speak for her as mine will for me.
As for Simons removing Julia's name from this topic title, well you'll have to ask him about that, I wouldn't have done it. Nor would I have "cleaned up" all extraneous posts though I can at least see how that serves a purpose and this topic is certainly more readable for such a pruning.
I suppose one of the differences between you and I John is that I don't try to impose MY standards in places where I am only a guest . . .Nic'
-
cedars
I suppose one of the difference between you and I John is that I don't try to impose MY standards in places where I am only a guest . . .
If your standards involve public naming and shaming rather than resolving grievances in a friendly and amicable way, then I am only too pleased that you and I are different.
Cedars
-
nicolaou
Head, meet wall . . .
