[James Ashton]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

I would appreciate a proof of that. Because without a proof, the things you are saying are just your personal opinion. And since the Bible seems to be the only relevant source of truth to you, I would love to see a Bible quote where it explicitly says that Satan influences laws and that statistics are influenced by deceptive liberals. Thank you ever so much

Silly girl. The best * bits of statistics are about hiding the truth: about taking the "average" and giving that instead of giving all the numbers or about asking only a certain number of people a question and pretending it applies to everyone.


God doesn't want us to do that. He wants us to show all the information. When Solomon was making his sea, does God say "oh, it was pretty big"? No, he tells us precisely how big:


1 Kings 7:23
And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.


or what about Mithredath the treasurer? Your precious lieberal statistics would say he brought a "mean" (and I pass by why you use a word like that instead of a "happy" or a "love") amount. Not God though:


Ezra 1:8-11
even those did Cyrus king of Persia bring forth by the hand of Mithredath the treasurer, and numbered them unto Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah. And this is the number of them: thirty chargers of gold, a thousand chargers of silver, nine and twenty knives, thirty basons of gold, silver basons of a second sort four hundred and ten, and other vessels a thousand. All the vessels of gold and of silver were five thousand and four hundred. All these did Sheshbazzar bring up with them of the captivity that were brought up from Babylon unto Jerusalem.


God is precise.


* As for the worst bits? Are you familiar with the phrase "standard deviation"? Statisticians are - it's how much of a deviant you are required to be to be considered "standard" by them.

[this_one]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

This is simply an assertion by you, made without supporting evidence. What statistical research? Research by whom, when and where? Peer reviewed papers only, please.

Here are just a few of the many papers and articles available on the subject:

http://ftp.iza.org/dp2063.pdf

http://www.nber.org/digest/jan07/w12171.html

http://nij.gov/topics/crime/child-abuse/pages/impact-on-arrest-victimization.aspx

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/250/abused_kids_more_likely_to_turn_to_crime/

Now I would like to see the Bible quote about laws being made by Satan and statistics being made by deceptive liberals. Thank you

[this_one]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

Are you familiar with the phrase "standard deviation"? Statisticians are - it's how much of a deviant you are required to be to be considered "standard" by them.

It seems that you aren't familiar with that phrase yourself. Here is what Encyclopedia Britannica has to say on the subject: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...dard-deviation
In case you don't understand this explanation, let this silly girl rephrase it for you: standard deviation signifies the difference between a statistical average of a variable and the lowest or highest instance of such variable. In other words, it measures how different anything or anyone is from the average.

[James Ashton]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

Also, from your own papers:

When the researchers looked at the children's race, they found that white children who had been abused and neglected were no more likely to be arrested for a violent crime than those who had not been abused or neglected.

Did you actually check what they said before posting them?

[this_one]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

From the same paper:

We find that maltreatment approximately doubles the probability of engaging in many types of crime.

[James Ashton]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

So we're agreed then. Your papers are written by hypocrites who say one thing in one place and something different in another.


This is what JewPincher was likely referring to when he was talking about not getting a true picture.


Glad I was able to help clear that up for you.

[this_one]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

So we're agreed then. Your papers are written by hypocrites who say one thing in one place and something different in another.


This is what JewPincher was likely referring to when he was talking about not getting a true picture.


Glad I was able to help clear that up for you.

Thank you very much, it's all clear now!

Now, could you please point me to the quote from the Bible which says that laws come from Satan and that statistics are made by deceptive liberals? Because as you said elsewhere, the only truth comes from the Bible. If you (or someone else) are unable to find such a quote in the Bible, you are a) lying or b) inferring that there exists a truth that doesn't come from the Bible.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

Here are just a few of the many papers and articles available on the subject:
http://ftp.iza.org/dp2063.pdf

OK, I've checked that one now. It's something called a discussion paper.

Did anyone else notice:

there is little hard evidence available about the effects of child maltreatment on crime, and there is criticism of the extent to which a “cycle of violence” has been substantiated in the literature (c.f. Widom, 1989a).

This gem was relegated to a footnore:

Administrative data on maltreatment and criminality capture only a fraction of all abuses and criminal ehaviors because not all maltreatment or criminal activity are reported to or captured by government agencies. Administrative data sets often also contain only limited information on important mediating factors such as family and socio-economic background. Furthermore, families about whom there are official records may be those more likely to come to the attention of official agencies, and thus may be an unrepresentative sample of families in which child abuse occurs (Smith and Thornberry, 1995). Rebellon and Van Gundy (2005) underscore the fact that little previous research has employed nationally representative samples.

Confirmation bias here:

While there are limitations of using large national data sets (primarily, the relative crudeness of the available measures of maltreatment), our work is a potentially important complement to small-scale studies that use more detailed measures. The key questions we address, including the identification of causal effects of maltreatment and potential differences by socio-economic status, are unlikely to be settled by research using small samples of children who are suspected of having been abused or who have already committed crimes.

This sentence made me investigate more thoroughly:

We find remarkably large and robust effects of maltreatment on a range of different measures of criminal activity.

Oh, look:

There has been surprisingly little discussion of an economic approach to the relationship between maltreatment and crime. Studies of the economics of crime suggest that many individuals engage in crime because they do not have good market alternatives (c.f. Freeman, 1999). Hence, if maltreatment reduces human capital accumulation, or otherwise impairs an individual’s ability to succeed in life, it may increase the risk that the individual engages in crime.

So, these "remarkably large and robust effects"
Where are they?
Well, there are a number of data included but no stats analysis at all. And that is not a criticism of the paper because it is not a statistical paper, it is a discussion paper and it identifies shortfalls in the available data and in the number and variety of discussions or analyses to date.

There is some tabulated information, little more than raw data, and perhaps a statistical function on a spreadsheet has been used to provide levels of significance, but how those were derived is not shown. Like, say if I press a button on my car and it goes and if someone asks me "how does your car work?" and I say "oh yeah, like you press this button and sit here and hold this and that's how it goes! Zooom!!" well, I haven't actually described how the thing works at all have I?

So if I selected a range of data and then selected a stats function from a drop down chart, that is not explaining (or even providing) statistics at all, either, it is?

In a discussion paper that is what I'd expect. There's nothing wrong with the paper. But it does not show what it was claimed to show.

Well, I think that's enough time on this.

[Attila's Wife]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

Thanks for that, Sister Mitza.

Well, I think that's enough time on this.

Indeed. Just for the record, the second link leads to a brief digest article (not an academic paper) which cites only the first and is full of weasel words such as one potential explanation... and estimates suggest that...

The last link is a brief piece of sloppy, anecdotal journalism from 2003 in something called Red Orbit.

No need to waste any more of your precious time.

YiC
AW

[Cranky Old Man]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

From the same paper:

We find that maltreatment approximately doubles the probability of engaging in many types of crime.

Your problem is that you are deliberately misrepresenting the facts. Maltreatment is ignoring your child and allowing them to do whatever they want. That leads to more crime and that is what I and the papers you quote completely agree on. Refusing to properly punish a child is the maltreatment here.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

Thank you very much, it's all clear now!

Now, could you please point me to the quote from the Bible which says that laws come from Satan and that statistics are made by deceptive liberals? Because as you said elsewhere, the only truth comes from the Bible. If you (or someone else) are unable to find such a quote in the Bible, you are a) lying or b) inferring that there exists a truth that doesn't come from the Bible.

I'm confused. Mr. Ashton explains to you that your papers are written by hypocrites who say one thing in one place and something different in another, and from this you conclude there must be a passage in the Holy Bible that says all laws in existence come from Satan? That's quite a logical leap there, dear. Perhaps you ought to slow down and simply read the Bible for starters. Then you'll know what's really in it. You don't have to take anyone's word that way, the LORD speaks for Himself.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

Satan
etymology .. context .. LXX .. cf Greek lexicon. DEVIL .SATAN. with other occurrences

Satan is God's adversary. Satan opposes God. Which obviously means that he opposes God's Just Law.

"How does that work, then?" a genuine enquirer might ask.

"Well, it's like if (say) I oppose you," I might reply "then I will act to thwart your intentions at every opportunity."

Therefore, it would be unnecessary to spell out, should the genuine enquirer request that her husband go to the shop and buy some gin then I (as the thwarter of the genuine enquirer's wishes) could be expected to waylay the husband and get him to something else (for example accompany me to a nightclub). As an alternative, if he were not amenable to my suggestion, I could walk with him to the shop but encourage him to buy liquorice instead of gin. And if that didn't work I could go mental and smash all the gin bottles in the shop or even shoot him. Anything to oppose the genuine enquirer's wishes. That is what an adversary does.

Satan's adversarial track record is extremely well documented. At every opportunity, from the historical account relating to Eve all the way to the future history recorded in Revelation, his uttmost desire is to oppose God.

Normally it would be unnecessary to spell out that that includes opposing God's Just Law. But in this case I will do so and highlight that when God's Perfect Love is opposed or contradicted in any way by some other law then the author of that other law is very easy to identify. There is only one candidate. Satan.

Secular laws criminalising God's very explicit commandments are necessarily satanic. That is what satanic means. I have included etymology and context in two early languages with a detailed example in English but from now on I would suggest any enquirers obsessing over this comparatively minor point—what a word means—should consult a dictionary.

[this_one]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

I'm confused. Mr. Ashton explains to you that your papers are written by hypocrites who say one thing in one place and something different in another, and from this you conclude there must be a passage in the Holy Bible that says all laws in existence come from Satan? That's quite a logical leap there, dear. Perhaps you ought to slow down and simply read the Bible for starters. Then you'll know what's really in it. You don't have to take anyone's word that way, the LORD speaks for Himself.

The whole time, I was talking about this quote from one of your brothers:

The problem with that is YOUR "statistics" are influenced by the deceptive liberals. So you don't get a true statistic. The only RIGHT law is what God commands of us. Maybe you should remember the fact that many laws come about due to the influence of Satan in the world.

I just asked for a proof of this from the Bible. If Mr. JewPincher isn't able to support his words by a quote from the Bible, he is violating this rule of your forum:

Scripture or it didn't happen!

(the quote is taken directly from here: http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=13090)

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

You know, I'm beginning to think you might be a secularist.

[this_one]

Re: The Christian guide to TORTURING your children

You know, I'm beginning to think you might be a secularist.

I'm just not a fanatic, that's all. But I guess that compared to your level of craziness (as you declare in your title), everyone looks secular