Re: Legalization: only way to beat "Terrorism's Harvest"

From: Les Cargill (lcargill_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 08/13/04 

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 02:54:53 GMT

Kent Paul Dolan wrote:

> "Les Cargill" <lcargill@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
>>needs a login
>
>
> None of the articles I read asked me to log in.
>
>
>>These correlations are not significant.
>
>
> Are you saying that because you don't understand
> what "significant at the 95% level" means, and how
> those correlations stack when lots of studies come
> up the same, are you saying that because you don't
> understand how peer reviewed journals work, or are
> you simply lying despite knowing the truth?
>

No, I do not mean "significant" as in a statistical sense.
I mean we cannot do a very good job of *really* figuring
out the costs of either branch of that particular decision
without considerable handwaving. I am also
saying that grandfathering previous expectations
has to carry some weight.

It doesn't matter; it's water under the bridge. But I'd
seen such figures as 5% of population would be positively
affected, against figueres like 20% being smokers. In an
odd way, that seems to bother more than it favors.

If I have a dog in the fight, it is that there
are fewer and fewer places for young people to
congregate where htere is live music. I don't
like that, particularly, but "it's for our own good".
>
>>The URLs above all* point to various things that
>>do not constitute a coherent, clear indictment of
>>secondhand smoke as a public health haazard.
>

They all ( at least the ones that came up) show
a bunch of prose claiming things that I
cannot verify
>
> Try reading the ones about the increased (doubled)
> respiratory problems of children in households where
> parents smoke.
>

I read what I can find and get to, and haven't run
across that one yet - at least in a more than merely
anectodal fashion.

>
>>Look, the people who carried the laws forward
>>don't even try to say they know it's bad, they say
>>"Yes, but what if"?
>
>
> This is nonsense.
>

No, it's how Prohibtion and several other lousy
policies became law. You seem unaware of the
men and women with high starched collars of
New English extraction that brought us this
great campaign of moral crusading.

>
>>*For a random sampled value of "all".
>
>
> I'm sorry, you are so far off base this far, I
> cannot be bothered to read the rest of what you
> wrote. I've been off climbing mountains and
> beachcombing, I have lots of Usenet to read that
> is better researched than what you wrote.
>

But I'm not claiming much if any research * at all*.
This is musing, not peer reviewed stuff.

> Yes, the studies are statistically significant, yes,
> the problems they documented are severe,

Not that I have seen - at least the claims made
show specific discorrelations ( which are to be assumed to
be decoupling-showing, not cause and effect ) for
some syndromes.

The data are still noisy, and it's very difficult
to do the full monty of deconvolution necessary
to really show much of anything.

  yes, the
> laws are passed in response to real, and well
> understood problems. Until you can get past those
> barriers that have you living in denial, not much
> else of what you have to say is of particular
> interest.
>
> xanthian.
>
> 

-- 
--
Les Cargill

Relevant Pages

  • Re: magic, morality, and mechanization
    ... such as those made by Newton's Laws. ... conclusions I might have drawn from the correlations, ... interpretations of wave function collapse do invoke randomness, ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: magic, morality, and mechanization
    ... such as those made by Newton's Laws. ... conclusions I might have drawn from the correlations, ... interpretations of wave function collapse do invoke randomness, ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: How can light travel without losing energy?
    ... What I am saying is that, ... MIGHT produce a similar reduction in energy to the reduction in velocity ... >from finding those laws or good approximations thereof. ... >our understanding of the laws of physics are adequate: ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Can someone make sense out of this theologian thing for me?
    ... saying a law is 'divine' or 'comes from God' when the observable process by ... That this is the way Baha'u'llah willed laws to be made in this ... > historian its my inclination to say at best it can be understood only ... a Baha'i or a follower of any otherc revealed religion. ...
    (talk.religion.bahai)
  • Re: Umpiring (part two)
    ... Hair had acted according to the Laws and that what ICC objected to was ... ha ha ha, very funny, 'the racists with their anti-hair agenda'. ... is like saying 'the racists with the anti-martin amis agenda'. ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
Quantcast