The Trial of Derek Chauvin

Samson

Deity
Joined
Oct 24, 2003
Messages
15,601
Location
Cambridge
I about choked when I saw somebody post that up to 50 units a week is probably healthy. That's both binge and alcoholism by everything I've heard at home. But I finally skirt by on that number as ok!
I should have been more explicit. That one paper put the cross over point at about 50 units a week, most others put it much lower. These are all also observational studies, and to actually get the direction of causation is hard. It could be for example that people who drink that much are richer than those who drink less, and being rich is good for your health.

The only thing that can really be learnt is that we do not know how much alcohol is good or bad for you. It probably varies massively by the person anyway.
 

Gorbles

Load Balanced
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
9,657
Location
UK
I dont think we can attribute the changes between Lucy and us to hormones. I'm sure there are many reasons including natural selection but the fact is we got bigger and smarter and deadlier. Thats why we're here and everybody else is gone.

I just noticed nothing in there was about Chauvin, other than the broader discussion about the causes for police brutality. Sorry
I gave you the link to refute your claims about human physiology, which you raised to justify your assumptions about inherent levels of violence in humans.

We are definitely not specifically talking about Chauvin, no. 23 pages in, I think there's some wiggle room.
 
Last edited:

Farm Boy

Useless, useless.
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
24,563
I should have been more explicit. That one paper put the cross over point at about 50 units a week, most others put it much lower. These are all also observational studies, and to actually get the direction of causation is hard. It could be for example that people who drink that much are richer than those who drink less, and being rich is good for your health.

The only thing that can really be learnt is that we do not know how much alcohol is good or bad for you. It probably varies massively by the person anyway.

I'm guessing people who are richer drink less, in my circles. They have more reliably varied entertainment options. The zoo/museum/arboretum and a light pint/glass of wine is more fun than TV and 12. But a lot more driving and money.

Edit: then again, you could have the joy of childhood, my kid is apparently is apparently chasing his bliss by getting ready for school and blasting Scotland the Brave from his bedroom. I mean, I like pipes fine, but they might need a curfew before 8 a.m.
 

Samson

Deity
Joined
Oct 24, 2003
Messages
15,601
Location
Cambridge
I'm guessing people who are richer drink less, in my circles. They have more reliably varied entertainment options. The zoo/museum/arboretum and a light pint/glass of wine is more fun than TV and 12. But a lot more driving and money.
I think you are probably right. My point was just that you should not read my post and go and drink 50 units every week because it may be good for you.
 

Farm Boy

Useless, useless.
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
24,563
Too late! Muahahahahaaaa.
 

GinandTonic

Saphire w/ Schweps + Lime
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
8,897

Samson

Deity
Joined
Oct 24, 2003
Messages
15,601
Location
Cambridge
Britain in second place? Dammit I'm doing my best but some of you slackers have to do your part too!
I am trying too, but the Irish are hard to beat.
 

Berzerker

Deity
Joined
Dec 30, 2000
Messages
21,785
Location
the golf course
I gave you the link to refute your claims about human physiology, which you raised to justify your assumptions about inherent levels of violence in humans.

We are definitely not specifically talking about Chauvin, no. 23 pages in, I think there's some wiggle room.

Your link argued hormone levels (and timing) can explain sexual dimorphism, it did not rule out other factors nor did it cite the cause. Maybe the cause was the increased investment mammalian females had in rearing the young 'ens. As a result parenthood required more risk from the father and that led to sexual dimorphism and natural selection and hormone levels were how. And thats why male cops (and soldiers) take on more risk and feel the need to protect women. So that explains why male cops are involved in more shootings than female cops.

If the cops were murderous racists we'd see the proof in the number of innocent unarmed ethnic minorities killed by them. I'd think the Democrats and BLM would have calculated that number as proof of their accusation if it supported their rhetoric. But it doesn't, so Trumpisaliar and the cops are racists. I dont have to pick a side to oppose theirs.
 

Gorbles

Load Balanced
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
9,657
Location
UK
If the cops were murderous racists we'd see the proof in the number of innocent unarmed ethnic minorities killed by them.
I mean, uh, we do. Isn't that the entire point?

(passing over for the time being the wonderful rabbit hole that is your personal crusade about how much men suffer to protect the fair lady folk)
 

Farm Boy

Useless, useless.
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
24,563
You could just leave the reason out and apply the same sort of logic to it as everything else. Men are significantly more likely to be killed in public. Public is clearly not designed in an effective manner to keep men from being killed, relatively speaking. An input that dwarfs all other demographic points other than age. Why that's a point here, dunno. Are we missing the forest for this tree? Actually?
 

Berzerker

Deity
Joined
Dec 30, 2000
Messages
21,785
Location
the golf course
I mean, uh, we do. Isn't that the entire point?

(passing over for the time being the wonderful rabbit hole that is your personal crusade about how much men suffer to protect the fair lady folk)

then what is it, how many died in 2019? and non-black poc die at the hands of cops at a lower rate than white people
 

Lexicus

Deity
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
29,633
Location
Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
If the cops were murderous racists we'd see the proof in the number of innocent unarmed ethnic minorities killed by them. I'd think the Democrats and BLM would have calculated that number as proof of their accusation if it supported their rhetoric. But it doesn't, so Trumpisaliar and the cops are racists. I dont have to pick a side to oppose theirs.

People like you will never admit any black person is "innocent" under any circumstances.
 

Farm Boy

Useless, useless.
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
24,563
Damn straight he was.
 

adcarrymaokai

Emperor
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
1,616
Damn, it took them a whole year to do the bare minimum under all the public pressure and with undeniable evidence. This country is so garbage. *yawn*
 

Estebonrober

Deity
Joined
Jan 9, 2017
Messages
5,404
If the cops were murderous racists we'd see the proof in the number of innocent unarmed ethnic minorities killed by them. I'd think the Democrats and BLM would have calculated that number as proof of their accusation if it supported their rhetoric. But it doesn't, so Trumpisaliar and the cops are racists. I dont have to pick a side to oppose theirs.

The George Floyd Justice bill's most important line is about accurate stat keeping by police forces across the nation. The fact is that the stats are muddy at best and intentionally obscured at worst. The honest answer is there is no answer for this atm, like guns and health outcomes in general, the public is kept intentionally ignorant. . .wonder why? I don't.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
9,509
Hillary lost to Trump and Obama before that, in part, because lots of people hate and despise her. I think that has less to do with the Iraq vote than you seem to think and more to do with Hillary herself, personally, aesthetically, and otherwise superficially. I could have been persuaded, prior to 2020, that it was also the fact that she was so deeply tied to and viewed as establishment, but Biden's election kinda dispelled that. Biden's election also dispelled the Iraq War vote explanation. Hillary lost because she was so widely, vehemently disliked, by so many people. And remember, that while she lost the election, she still won the popular vote.

Are we sure about this? Obama was one of the few congressmen who voted against the Iraq War (even most Democrats supported it initially) and this absolutely helped him get elected.
 

Sommerswerd

Shades of the Sun
Supporter
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
22,151
Location
Murica
Are we sure about this?
Not sure what you mean by "we". I'm sure. You apparently aren't sure of anything in this regard, especially since you are confused about basic facts, for instance:
Obama was one of the few congressmen who voted against the Iraq War.
No. He wasn't:nope: Obama wasn't in the US Congress during the Iraq War vote. So your statement that:
this absolutely helped him get elected.
is absolutely wrong, because "this" didn't even happen.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom