Re: Lying John Francis:

>>>>>>>>> "Popeye" <popeye@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Still waiting for you to cite this lie:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guess for all the times I've accused you of using questionable
>>>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>>>> it shouldn't take me a second look to be sure this one was just
>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>> more fake in a long line of trumped up or at least selective
>>>>>>>>>> data. -JOF
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ===============
>>>>>>>>>> "Popeye" <popeye@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:12f3hecpn8udq3e@news.supernews.com...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess for all the times I've accused you of using questionable
>>>>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That's a lie.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You've -never- once accused me of using questionable data, at
>>>>>>>>>> least with a
>>>>>>>>>> cite of any data.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please verify this (as if -that- would -ever- happen).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When I use data (rarely), it comes from front line news
>>>>>>>>>> publications* or
>>>>>>>>>> the U.S. Government.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> it shouldn't take me a second look to be sure this one was just
>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>> more fake in a long line of trumped up or at least selective
>>>>>>>>>>> data.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Should be -no- problem, with that "long line", for you to
>>>>>>>>>> cite -several-
>>>>>>>>>> instances of your accusation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Like last time, when it was about "buying the pot", eh?
>>>>>>>>>> ==================
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And that being said the antigun arguments are proportionally
>>>>>>>>>> useless
>>>>>>>>>> for the same reasons. That's why I have trouble coming up with
>>>>>>>>>> valid
>>>>>>>>>> cites to support some of my contentions - it's hard to find
>>>>>>>>>> objective
>>>>>>>>>> evidence, and subjective evidence is misleading. -JOF
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you see though how all this discussion validates my contention
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> stats can be used, misused or abused? It's tough for the observer
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> know for sure which is the case, particularly if the
>>>>>>>>>> comparability is
>>>>>>>>>> really apples and oranges? -JOF
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2000
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Suds, this is the type of information the general public
>>>>>>>>>> receives. This is
>>>>>>>>>> simply an example of why I ask people to spend a little time
>>>>>>>>>> investigating this
>>>>>>>>>> question thoroughly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2002
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>On gun-related crime, the NRA tries to say that guns don't
>>>>>>>>>>>increase the
>>>>>>>>>>>homicide rate. Compare the UK and the US. In the US there are 10
>>>>>>>>>>>times as
>>>>>>>>>>>many homicides per 100,000 population than in the UK. Doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>>that tell
>>>>>>>>>>>people something?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No. First off, get your information from government statistics,
>>>>>>>>>> not pro -or-
>>>>>>>>>> anti gun orgs.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2003
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Stay off the HCI website and refer to government statistics.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2004
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>From: "Greg Mossman" moss...@qnet.com
>>>>>>>>>>> It's tough to refute all the studies sponsored by the wealthy
>>>>>>>>>>> NRA
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No it's not, they just make up shit.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2005
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess we could only trust statistics from the NRA, huh?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As opposed to an anti-handgun source?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Try the federal government.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2005
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you not think that just maybe the NRA is presenting only that
>>>>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>>>>> which supports its objective?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't employ NRA data, and didn't read the article.
>>>>>>>>>> Although I'm a life member of the NRA, I realize their bias just
>>>>>>>>>> as I
>>>>>>>>>> realize the bias of antigun organization.
>>>>>>>>>> My views come from the empirical evidence of my own experiences,
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> recorded history.
>>>>>>>>>> When I need facts or numbers, I use government information.
>>>>>>>>>> While its' perfect neither, it's at least somewhat less bias.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You are assuming that I have assumptions and you are assuming
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> the NRA is presenting facts.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You're still presenting the same assumptions, and, you've yet
>>>>>>>>>> again
>>>>>>>>>> assumed that I use NRA data.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2005
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If memory serves me, I've never once quoted an NRA cite, or even
>>>>>>>>>> one from the pro-gun cites that Scott uses.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I only quote government figures.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ==================
>>>>
>>>> 2006
>>>>
>>>>> I've read most if not all of your cites
>>>>
>>>> That's a lie, because your below description of them is incorrect.
>>>>
>>>> I don't cite gun groups, pro or against, and you're a bullshit artist.
>>>>
>>>> I only cite govmnt figures, including the ones from JMJr, that you're
>>>> swooning like you never saw before, and have stated so here many times.
>>>>
>>>> I have previously cited Lott, as did Newsweek magazine, but even laid
>>>> off
>>>> that lately.
>>>>
>>>> You just apparently forgot.
>>>> =====================
>>>>
>>>>>> Here's another lie, to make it three, per your request:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2006
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 89 From: Popeye - view profile
>>>>>> Date: Sun, Feb 5 2006 12:47 pm
>>>>>> Email: "Popeye" <Pop...@Finalprotectivefire.com>
>>>>>> Groups: rec.scuba
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "JOF" <jofran...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>>> news:qg4cu15umlndo4pp3djda30tet8h5g674c@4ax.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>But I'm sure you'll have some trite phrasing to rationalize that
>>>>>>>>>>>too - from the gospel according to St.Chuck etched on the stone
>>>>>>>>>>>tablets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And as I correct you -again-, for the -second time- in a -week-,
>>>>>>>>>> I don't quote the NRA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Paraphrase?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You lie.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Having been -repeatedly- decimated on the topic, it's all you have
>>>>>>>> left.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're delusional. No matter how many times you squeak "liar" it is
>>>>>>> hardly gonna become decimation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You lie.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I cite it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Above, you are lying.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> =======================
>>>>>>>>>> * sometimes, and not recently, I quote Lott, from Newsweek.
>>>>>>>>>> The point is just as good as the numbers.
>>>>>>>>>> =======================
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Still waiting for you to cite this lie as well:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ========================
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> uhoh. Now that your liar ploy has been turned on you, you're
>>>>>>>>>>> gonna drag
>>>>>>>>>>> out the obfuscation gambit.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you have any of the cites I've asked for?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can you cite the lie you're referring to above?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Did you have any comment about the lie you told that I already
>>>>>>>>>> cited?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please remember that while you falsely accuse me quite
>>>>>>>>>> frequently, flatly
>>>>>>>>>> refusing to provide evidence, I'm not the one that sent you the
>>>>>>>>>> video.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Are you going to start in on someone else now, who's treated you
>>>>>>>>>> respectfully in the past?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, there's that credibility of yours I describe.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Go ahead. It's rainy and crappy here so I'm
>>>>>>>>>>> working at the computer anyway. I'll keep an eye on the group
>>>>>>>>>>> for more
>>>>>>>>>>> of your nonsense. I appreciate the diversion.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> =======================
>>>>>>>>>>> But since you chose to post the email response I sent to you,
>>>>>>>>>>> I'll just
>>>>>>>>>>> use it as an opening to put an end to my involvement in this
>>>>>>>>>>> peculiar
>>>>>>>>>>> thread and leave you to take it where you will. My departure
>>>>>>>>>>> alone
>>>>>>>>>>> should keep you frothing at the mouth for at least a couple of
>>>>>>>>>>> days.
>>>>>>>>>>> Have fun.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> JF
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Scuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy yyyyyyy
>>>>>>>>>> yyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Guess we aren't getting any cites of your previous accusations,
>>>>>>>>>> or your
>>>>>>>>>> lies from today.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Imaaaaaaaaaagine -that-.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Oh, and, try and keep this in mind, the next time we discuss
>>>>>>>>>> scurrying,
>>>>>>>>>> and ass-whippings, to save me having to look it up.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Perfect timing, too, I have to froth over to get the Sex Twins
>>>>>>>>>> to take
>>>>>>>>>> them to "Pirates Of The Caribbean", and then maybe a night dive.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Enjoy the view of your own rectum.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Popeye
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Listen, strange woman lying in ponds distributing swords
>>>>>>>>>> is no basis for a system of government. Monty Python
>>>>>>>>>> www.finalprotectivefire.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>