Glenn Beck Says All Hispanics Should Go Back Where They Came From!

[MobBoss]

Let's work that out based on these known facts

You are moving goalposts. Your original comment said 'struck' by lightning...not 'killed' by lightning. Here let me quote you since you seem to have forgotten it only after a few posts:

The odds of being struck by lightning are far greater.

I bolded the pertinent word in that sentence.

That means there are appoximately 700 people struck by lightning each year in the US which result in injury or death.

In relation to how many lightning strikes hitting the earth? 700 x 500k or 700k?

That translates into 17.5 people struck by lighning per year compared to 2.7 deaths per year by rocket and mortar.

Bolded words to indicate the moving goalposts and comparison of two different sets of data.

Do you?

I didnt think you would. I was right.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Or we could convince the Palestinians to emigrate. That would help end the conflict too.

The point is that they shouldn't have to. No one asked them if five million Jews could have their land.

 

[Whiskey_Lord]

I myself believe the past is done; Israel's Israel and America's America. Let's move on with our lives and make the best of our future to make up for the sins of the past. -TaniciusFox

Probably one of the most intelligent things I've ever seen some one post on this forum. Well done.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I like how the threadstarter uses the martyr approach "can you imagine the firestorm if anybody remotely important to the right in this country said something like that" and does exactly what he so riles against of someone on the right said something like that.

Irony at it's finest. Thank you OP, monday looks a little brighter already

 

[Tani Coyote]

Probably one of the most intelligent things I've ever seen some one post on this forum. Well done.

Thank you.

Mostly, I just don't buy the "they stole our land" stuff. Especially considering the fact that nearly every nationality "stole" its land in some way, or are descended from people who stole it by force of arms.

How long must you hold a land before it is yours and no longer stolen? (Incoming Europa Universalis jokes)

I say if you are born on it, you have the right to keep it(to an extent). All native Israelis have just as much right to their home nation as the Palestinians do; similarly, I am just as native to America as any of the tribes. My ancestors were not, but they are just that: ancestors, not me. Don't punish the son - or great great etc. grandson - for the sins of the father.

You can't support the eviction of Israel based on the land being "stolen" unless you support the eviction of all other peoples to East Africa. Or eviction period, as it sets a bad precedent where entire groups are subject to eviction for whatever ridiculous reason... isn't Israel's eviction of Arabs one of the main reasons people dislike them? I thought an eye for an eye makes the world blind?

 

[FriendlyFire]

LOL wait, only got to page (1/2) one,.. How the hell did the word "Zionists" come up?

Am I going to find the words Nazi on page two?

You cant have Glenn Beck without Nazis

 

[civ_king]

You are moving goalposts. Your original comment said 'struck' by lightning...not 'killed' by lightning. Here let me quote you since you seem to have forgotten it only after a few posts:



I bolded the pertinent word in that sentence.



In relation to how many lightning strikes hitting the earth? 700 x 500k or 700k?



Bolded words to indicate the moving goalposts and comparison of two different sets of data.



I didnt think you would. I was right.

conservative estimates (total of people know to be hit) is (reported deaths + injuries) 1/750,000 people killed by rockets& stuff 2.7
provided more than 2,025,000 are in areas and can be hit (out of 7,587,000) than Lighting kills more

 

[Formaldehyde]

You are moving goalposts.

I'm not "moving goalposts" at all. Here is my original statement:

The odds of being struck by lightning are far greater. Perhaps Israel should practice apartheid against storms next.

You apparently thought the statistics meant per lifetime instead of per year!

Odds of being struck in your lifetime (Est. 80 years) 1/6250

So using your own figures:

The odds of being stuck by lightning are between 1:500,000 and 1:700,000.

Emphasis mine.

That means that given a population of 7.5M people, each year 10 to 15 of them would be struck by lightning if their odds are the same as the ones you just quoted. That is obviously far more than the 2.7 deaths per year from rocket and mortar attacks over the past 10 years.

So, are you going to admit you were "wrong" as you wished me to do?

I didnt think you would. I was right.

 

[MobBoss]

That means that each year 10 to 15 Israelis would be struck by lightning if their odds are the same. That is obviously far more than the 2.7 deaths per year from rocket and mortar attacks over the past 10 years.

Except, just like lightning hits, not all rocket and mortar hits are fatal either. Thats where you make your error, just like I said, comparing two different sets of data.....one for struck, the other..deaths.

Also, the odds of being killed by lightning is far greater than 1:500l/1:700k or so since obviously not every lightning strike is fatal. Thus you err in several different spots in your estimations.

You also use data from the USA to extrapolate the rate of lightning strikes in Israel, while the two countries dont have the same weather patterns or even the same density of population. Assuredly there is error in that assumption too.

So, are you going to admit you were "wrong" as you wished me to do?

No need, I already proved you wrong on several levels.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Except, just like lightning hits, not all rocket and mortar hits are fatal either..

I didn't say "deaths by lightning". I said "struck". And I was comparing that to the number "killed" by rockets and mortar attacks, a figure which I have used repeatedly in this forum to show how overblown this supposed "threat" clearly is. So who's moving the goalposts now?

No need, I already proved you wrong on several levels.

"I didn't think you would. I was right."

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

According to statistics, there is a 1 in 20 billion chance of death by a tea cosy.

 

[MobBoss]

I didn't say "deaths". I said "struck". So who's moving the goalposts now?

You were the one that bolded this earlier in support of your argument:

Only about 10% of people who are struck by lightning are killed

Do you not remember? It was only a few posts ago. Thus I was merely addressing a goal post that you had already moved in making your rambling, all over the place, argument.

From the wiki on it:

Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks on Israel from the Gaza Strip have occurred since 2001. As of January 2009, over 8,600 rockets had been launched, leading to 28 deaths and several hundred injuries,[1][2] as well as widespread psychological trauma and disruption of daily life.[3]

Its not even an argument in comparison. To laugh off these rocket attacks and to compare them to lightning strikes shows a decided lack of compassion or appreciation for those being attacked. Thats pretty pathetic in my opinion.

You were the first one to bring up lightning fatalities...not me. Thats just a matter of fact. And now you want to use it as evidence that I moved goal posts when you were the one that brought it into the discussion?

"I didn't think you would. I was right."

You do understand that one can be hit by rocket/mortar fire and not be killed, right? Thus you are struck by it and its not fatal, right?

My referring to deaths via lightning was trying to apply your own false assumptions in a consistent manner across both situations.

I notice you ignored the other valid errors that I pointed out. Nice.

Its actually not even arguable if one simply considers the number of rockets/mortars fired into Gaza and how many are hurt by those vs the number of lightning strikes that occur. There are going to be hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lightning strikes in a given area in a year, resulting in a small number of hits and an even smaller number of deaths. Its not rocket science to see that rockets and mortars from Gaza have a better success rate than lightning simply based upon the number of rounds fired vs success.

 

[Formaldehyde]

You do understand that one can be hit by rocket/mortar fire and not be killed, right?

I never stated that I was comparing the number struck by rocket or mortar fire to the number struck by lightning. That goalpost was moved by you!

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

There should be a law against the way both of you are raping statistics.

 

[MobBoss]

I never stated that I was comparing the number struck by rocket or mortar fire to the number struck by lightning. That goalpost was moved by you!

No, it was the logical assumption of your initial statement. Your first comment on this was:

The odds of being struck by lightning are far greater.

And that was it in relation to rockets being a viable threat to Israel.

That wasnt a moved goalpost. You were the one that mentioned 'struck'...not 'killed'. When I argued that the stuck comment was false (it is) thats when you started moving goalposts, talking about populations, fatalities, etc.



Wow, Form, I dont think you have ever lost an point so badly before. Everything you have tried to accuse me of in this was actually done by you, not me. And the sad thing is, its right there for everyone to read too.

EDIT: I love the defense of 'its commonly done' as an excuse for using the term in error. Awesome. The point being, the article you give actually uses the comparison correctly by also comparing the pertinent data..........you....not so much.

 

[Formaldehyde]

There should be a law against the way both of you are raping statistics.

You mean the way that most rational people compare the actual risks?

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/01/nate_silver_on.html

There were a total of 674 passengers, not counting crew or the terrorists themselves, on the flights on which these incidents occurred. By contrast, there have been 7,015,630,000 passenger enplanements over the past decade. Therefore, the odds of being on given departure which is the subject of a terrorist incident have been 1 in 10,408,947 over the past decade. By contrast, the odds of being struck by lightning in a given year are about 1 in 500,000. This means that you could board 20 flights per year and still be less likely to be the subject of an attempted terrorist attack than to be struck by lightning.

In 2008, 37,000 people died in automobile accidents -- the lowest number since 1961. Even so, that's more than a 9/11 worth of fatalities every month, month after month, year after year.

There are all sorts of psychological biases that cause us to both misjudge risk and overreact to rare risks, but we can do better than that if we stop and think rationally.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

In the year 1947 in the United States of America more people were kicked to death by donkeys than were killed in civilian flying accidents

 

[Formaldehyde]

Which means you shouldn't irrationally fear flying?

 

[MobBoss]

8600 rocket/mortar attacks.

28 deaths. Hundreds of injuries.

Thats roughly 1:300 odds of Hamas getting a fatality on any particular rocket attack...much higher than that if you add in injuries.

Last I checked, 1:300 or less is a bit better odds than 1:500k or so. /shrug.

 

[Formaldehyde]

It also means the odds of being struck by lightning are far greater than being killed in a rocket/morter attack.