🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@lmrocha

Every scientist decides what is proper analysis on their own, there is no way to decide that without someone reading and engaging their own reasoning on the quality of the literature... peer review helps us know that there arent likely to be technical errors in a particular paper, but it does nothing (and is not intended to anything) to tell you which societal questions a paper successfully answers or doesnt.

@mike805

@lmrocha

No I am saying there is plenty of literature and it shows various things, none of which shows more guns causes the problem. They show other facts, those facts are not relevant to what we are debating though.

@mike805

@lmrocha

Ahh personal attacks... I mean lets face it anti-gun people "easily dismiss" anything that doesnt agree with their world view.

The good news is kids who actually have ever been involved in a school shooting are so extraordinarily rare I'd never have to have that conversation in a lifetime...

Its amazing that not saying something that is undeniably false by any measure is being an "apologist" lol.. yes lets not be apologists and make up fact statements and then defend them even when we know they are lies, thats the way to solve problems.

The fact is you've said multiple things that are either lies, or ridiculously uneducated on the subject.. whichever of the two it is it does discredit you in having a valid point of view in the discussion, particularly when you double down on defending it rather than acknowledging and learning from your error.

@mike805

@mike805

You can literally mix 2 chemicals froma super market and kill a train load of people... probably takes more brain power to learn to drive to be honest.

@lmrocha @thatguyoverthere

Happy easter everyone... as you know zombie jesus is the final evolution of the jesus pokemon, and the most sacred of pokemon among christians... So have a wonderful easter everyone!

@mike805

I'd argue poisons are the easist way to do mass killings... its been done, a bag of poison someone makes, takes it on a train, opens the bag, everyone dies... easy to make, kills en masse at a level comparable or exceeding guns.. no reasonable way to protect against it directly so only real option is to convince people to stop wanting to murder.

@lmrocha @thatguyoverthere

@lmrocha

If you call a non-automatic gun an "automatic" you are 1) showing unprofessional bias by using an explicitly incorrect word to refer to something for dramatic effect.. 2) Appear uneducated on the subject and are easily dismissed.

@mike805

@mike805

Yes obviously true, but you know what I meant.

@lmrocha @thatguyoverthere

@lmrocha

A lack of good quality peer-reviewed studies also doesnt demonstrate much... Sadly peer-review is **not** how scientists determine if a paper makes a good argument. It only validates that the analysis is free from error, not that it is appropriate analysis to draw a particular conclusion...

If you have any peer-reviewed studies that do proper analysis (we laid out what that meant already) Im all ears... I dont know of any so all we have left is our own work... feel free to share if you know of any, I have seen none from you either.

@mike805

@lmrocha

great then lets do that:

Since guns dont require licenses, we shouldnt require licenses to drive cars either... Through the use of comparison you made a strong argument to abolish car licenses :)

Yea I dunno that sounds like a bad way to argue.

@thatguyoverthere @mike805

@lmrocha

Conducting and designing experiments for statistical analysis is my job. Not saying this for any reason than it is important to note that the kind of study useful for one sort of analysis isnt useful for another.

Yes controlled randomized studies are great for medication, horrible for judging nations. So while, yes it is the best study approach for vaccines, or medication, or biomarkers, it has no place in a gun debate. This should be obvious why, in a drug trial you can and do control all (hopefully) relevant variables, when talking about nations and gun control you cant.

There are a few peer-reviewed papers on granger causality and gun control, but sadly none that I like (even the ones that support my stance I dont feel were conducted well). I can of course do the analysis directly with you, or talk about the literature and its faults (I did this in an earlier thread briefly)... but rather than providing copy pasta of a bunch of flawed studies I'd rather just admit the fact that the body of research on this is of poor quality and encourage better research. Until that happens (because there is certainly a need for proper studies) we will have to rely on directly studying this ourselves.

Want to go over some of the public datasets, which wouldnt fall under peer-review, of this data and do a casual analysis let me know, I'd be happy to post the charts and do a deep dive with you.

@icedquinn @mike805

@pj

The idiocy of the argument is when we look at what the AR-15 is, there is nothing special that makes it good at mass shootings, it is just common.

In fact it is pretty much the most low-powered rifle you can buy, it is a small-game rifle and not considered effective at medium (hogs) to larger game like deer.

So, as with most of the anti-gun rhetorix it is one of those "feel good, does nothing and makes the situation worse" sort of trade offs.

@lore Frankly I find it amazing that C and C++ in general are as portable as they are.

@lore Its still black magic, you just became the magician :)

@Pat

I have little doubt an animal started the pandemic... Of course this doesnt rule out it being man "bred", but that doesnt have strong evidence to support it.

@trinsec @acjay