madame_zora
Sexy Member
Wow. Still quoting that Lancet study. You probably still think Dreyfus was guilty, too.
If you're up on your statistics, you know how bogus that Lancet crap is. Too bad, really - not long ago it was one of the best medical journals available in English. The other good one was the New England Journal of Medicine. Both have succumbed to PC bullshit in recent years. NEJM was the venue for Arthur Kellerman's bogus gun studies, which were so bad that even Congress finally noticed, and axed the CDC's budget for junk science (the source of Kellerman's funds).
But people don't know shit about statistics, or much else, it seems. Good thing we're all experts and don't need math to tell us shit from Shinola.
Well, that's YOUR opinion, no doubt confirmed by your own assesment?
You dismiss anything inconvenient as PC bullshit, but where's YOUR source?
And what if it IS overinflated, by say a hundread thousand or so? Please, find a problem with the concept that we've killed more of theirs than they've killed of ours. Please, I just can't wait.
Statistics is one of the few things I do understand. I understand how they're gathered, I understand that they're likely to represent the original premise being studied, I understand how they get funding, and even the error rates of collected data. I understand the peer-review process and even how many institutions are set up to appear more legitimate than they actually are. I'm really not completely in the dark, this point is just too easy to make to require much effort.
A statement was made by the OP that Islam is such a violent religion, and I was refuting that saying Christianity always has been and STILL fucking is. We're better organised, better armed, and far more deadly. Refute ANY of THAT statement.