If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
Dontcha think posting bank account numbers is
just a bit too much, Kane? And they were on Moore's web site also weren't they? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
"Greegor" wrote in message ups.com... Dontcha think posting bank account numbers is just a bit too much, Kane? And they were on Moore's web site also weren't they? He supports Moore! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
Greegor wrote: Dontcha think posting bank account numbers is just a bit too much, Kane? Yes, I do. I wonder who actually did it. And they were on Moore's web site also weren't they? Were they? Please post a link to the page where they were posted. I notice some other claims by Ken as to things Moore is supposed to have displayed, but can't be found with proof Moore is the author. Why do you suppose that is, Greg? I see krp has run up a few posts addressed to me with the usual lies about what he's posted and about what I've posted, and claims he did this or that the refuted my claims, where he has done nothing of the sort. Interesting how it all detracts from alt.suppor.cps and our topics related to that. You happy now? Or ashamed as you should be? Kane |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
On 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:
Greegor wrote: I see krp has run up a few posts addressed to me with the usual lies about what he's posted and about what I've posted, and claims he did this or that the refuted my claims, where he has done nothing of the sort. And I don't see you responding, Kane. The proven LIAR here is YOU! He refuted your claim that spanking causes aggression. The beauty is he used that same source you provided; thus exposing your STUPIDITY for everyone to see. ;-) Doan |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
Doan wrote:
On 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote: Greegor wrote: I see krp has run up a few posts addressed to me with the usual lies about what he's posted and about what I've posted, and claims he did this or that the refuted my claims, where he has done nothing of the sort. And I don't see you responding, Kane. He had his chance. He ran, as you did when you had yours. You weren't even willing to prove you had the same study I did. Coward. The proven LIAR here is YOU! Not hardly. He refuted your claim that spanking causes aggression. No he didn't. And I didn't make that claim. I never said 'cause,' as "leads to," does not note an affirmative claim based on cause. It can be correlation, as anyone knows that read the article, and anyone knows that reads or participated in social science research. You are just trying to run interference for him, establishing once again, your moral turpitude. The beauty is he used that same source you provided; thus exposing your STUPIDITY for everyone to see. ;-) Beauty? Claiming that the only meaning possible for "leads to" is "cause," and denying that it can mean "correlation," as the research was actually about? Nope. You wouldn't be deliberately trying to mislead folks, would you now, Doan? Doan He ran. Notice all his resource material to prove his claim that children are at risk of developing "sociopathy" behavior if they aren't spanked? Tell you what. Why don't you take a look at that evidence he provided and give us your comments on it, pro or con? I won't even ask for a bi-opponent setting. So, what do you think of his evidence? Be sure and provide a link back to it. I can't seem to find it myself. Just poor research ability I guess. R RR RR R R R Kane |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:
Doan wrote: On 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote: Greegor wrote: I see krp has run up a few posts addressed to me with the usual lies about what he's posted and about what I've posted, and claims he did this or that the refuted my claims, where he has done nothing of the sort. And I don't see you responding, Kane. He had his chance. He ran, as you did when you had yours. You weren't even willing to prove you had the same study I did. Coward. The coward is you, hiding behind a fakery name! ;-) The proven LIAR here is YOU! Not hardly. Very easily done because, Kane, you are SO STUPID! He refuted your claim that spanking causes aggression. No he didn't. And I didn't make that claim. You are lying again! Yes, you did make that claim! I never said 'cause,' as "leads to," does not note an affirmative claim based on cause. It can be correlation, as anyone knows that read the article, and anyone knows that reads or participated in social science research. You are EXPOSING your STUPIDITY again! You are just trying to run interference for him, establishing once again, your moral turpitude. Establishing, once again, that you are a STUPID LIAR! The beauty is he used that same source you provided; thus exposing your STUPIDITY for everyone to see. ;-) Beauty? Yup! It's in the eyes of the beholder! ;-) Claiming that the only meaning possible for "leads to" is "cause," and denying that it can mean "correlation," as the research was actually about? You are EXPOSING you STUPIDITY again. Do you understand what a "correlation" is? Nope. You wouldn't be deliberately trying to mislead folks, would you now, Doan? I am deliberately exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-) Doan He ran. Hihihi! You are STUPID! Notice all his resource material to prove his claim that children are at risk of developing "sociopathy" behavior if they aren't spanked? The burden of proof is on you, STUPID! Tell you what. Why don't you take a look at that evidence he provided and give us your comments on it, pro or con? Why would I do that? I am not arguing with him, I am arguing with you, STUPID! I won't even ask for a bi-opponent setting. No, you just being stupid! So, what do you think of his evidence? The burdent of proof is on you. Stop trying to divert! Be sure and provide a link back to it. I can't seem to find it myself. Just poor research ability I guess. R RR RR R R R You are famous for your "formidable research skill" right? Kane |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
Doan wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote: Doan wrote: On 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote: Greegor wrote: I see krp has run up a few posts addressed to me with the usual lies about what he's posted and about what I've posted, and claims he did this or that the refuted my claims, where he has done nothing of the sort. And I don't see you responding, Kane. He had his chance. He ran, as you did when you had yours. You weren't even willing to prove you had the same study I did. Coward. The coward is you, hiding behind a fakery name! ;-) Observer. Opinions. Fern. and the hundreds of others. Are they cowards? You know my name, and you know why I don't post it here. And you know that it's morally acceptable to mislead if others are in danger, or even one's self. Physically, and for one's life. You can't believe I've had death threats, or not, but I know, and anyone reading the ascps newsgroup knows the kind of folks that have posted here in the past The proven LIAR here is YOU! Not hardly. Very easily done because, Kane, you are SO STUPID! Nope. Very easily done because you know of one instance were I deliberately mislead. Would you care to put someone's family at risk, Doan? I wonder if you are as without honor as I say you are. He refuted your claim that spanking causes aggression. No he didn't. And I didn't make that claim. You are lying again! Yes, you did make that claim! Show where I claimed that "spanking causes aggression," as you claim above. I never said 'cause,' as "leads to," does not note an affirmative claim based on cause. It can be correlation, as anyone knows that read the article, and anyone knows that reads or participated in social science research. You are EXPOSING your STUPIDITY again! Nope. The article shows no such claim was going to be supported. And "leads to" can mean either. The weight would go to what follows. Does the material following the title support any claim that the researchers found "cause" for spanking leading to aggression? You are just trying to run interference for him, establishing once again, your moral turpitude. Establishing, once again, that you are a STUPID LIAR! Well, first, you are morally decadent. Anyone can see that. Even in this short exchange. You tried to threaten me with exposure as part of you losing so badly here and wanted so desperately to recover. I can provide evidence of the threats to myself and my family. And I have publicly stated them here, and I have proof you have read those posts because you replied when I made the claim. Of course, you following through with your threat would prove my point, Doan. Even you know that. And I'd report you to your authorities. You know that too. Let them deal with you. I won't compromise my family for you. Only you have the power to do that. Secondly, you are intervening in the claims of a liar and coward, who ran from a simple debate and now is continuing to lie about what I did, what I said, and even what he said. He lied about the source, the content, and his claim that he knew of evidence to prove that unspanked children are at risk of developing "sociopathy," as he put it. You interjecting your self between us is plain enough, Doan. The beauty is he used that same source you provided; thus exposing your STUPIDITY for everyone to see. ;-) Beauty? Yup! It's in the eyes of the beholder! ;-) You have failed to support his claim. Claiming that the only meaning possible for "leads to" is "cause," and denying that it can mean "correlation," as the research was actually about? You are EXPOSING you STUPIDITY again. Do you understand what a "correlation" is? Absolutely. No claim for anything else was made. You have not supported his claim that the title can ONLY mean "caused by." And what follows the title shows that no such claim of causality was being made, as he claims. Nope. You wouldn't be deliberately trying to mislead folks, would you now, Doan? I am deliberately exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-) That I disagree that "leads to" means, "caused by," and cannot mean, "is correlated to?" No, Doan. You are proving your own. And exposing it. Doan He ran. Hihihi! You are STUPID! I waited in aps for him. He didn't show. Is that all you can say in the way of argument? Notice all his resource material to prove his claim that children are at risk of developing "sociopathy" behavior if they aren't spanked? The burden of proof is on you, STUPID! Nope. He made the claim above. I asked him to show that evidence he knew of. Where is it? Possibly you'd like to find it for him if he hasn't produced it. Tell you what. Why don't you take a look at that evidence he provided and give us your comments on it, pro or con? Why would I do that? I am not arguing with him, I didn't ask you to. I am arguing with you, I know you are.... STUPID! And I asked for your opinion of any evidence he posted to prove his claim about non-spanked children. If he posted it, please comment. If he didn't then feel free to find it yourself. If you don't wish to, of course you are not obligated to argue it with me, but you just said you are arguing with me. About what? If not the subject I brought up. That was about Ken and his claims, which is the subject so far. I won't even ask for a bi-opponent setting. No, you just being stupid! Nope. Just once again, offering to debate you, and watching you lay down your path out of here. So, what do you think of his evidence? The burdent of proof is on you. Stop trying to divert! No it isn't. I didn't make the claim. He did. If you don't want to carry water for him, that's okay with me. However you are trying to, and failing, on the issue of "leads to" only meaning "caused by." Be sure and provide a link back to it. I can't seem to find it myself. Just poor research ability I guess. R RR RR R R R You are famous for your "formidable research skill" right? I seemed to be able to find posts by me about your dear old teacher Aline, where I had mentioned her before and you seemed to have "forgotten." I don't know them, is what I think you said. You don't know Doheny Mansion and the nice old nun that taught language for so many years on the campus? Kane I can see the steam all the way from USC, Doan. R R R RR R R |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
"0:-" wrote in message news:qM6dncJGdfc94S_YnZ2dnUVZ_rKvnZ2d@scnresearch. com... Claiming that the only meaning possible for "leads to" is "cause," and denying that it can mean "correlation," as the research was actually about? The statement that X "LEADS TO" Y IS a statement in causality Kane you stupid HUMP! |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, krp wrote:
"0:-" wrote in message news:qM6dncJGdfc94S_YnZ2dnUVZ_rKvnZ2d@scnresearch. com... Claiming that the only meaning possible for "leads to" is "cause," and denying that it can mean "correlation," as the research was actually about? The statement that X "LEADS TO" Y IS a statement in causality Kane you stupid HUMP! Hahaha! Kane EXPOSED his STUPIDITY again. Yet, he had the nerver to claim that he is a "published researcher". Doan |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks
krp wrote:
"0:-" wrote in message news:qM6dncJGdfc94S_YnZ2dnUVZ_rKvnZ2d@scnresearch. com... Claiming that the only meaning possible for "leads to" is "cause," and denying that it can mean "correlation," as the research was actually about? Yah know, Ken, Ron, who happens to oppose my views on corporal punish to a degree spoke up in your behalf and you ignored him. He gave you a very large hint that you were in deep **** to argue with me on an issue. You ignored him, and in fact blustered and blew hard yet again...rather than take a look at my posting history and what happens when someone makes a weakly support affirmative claim, Ken. Let's look at your bull**** claim that I have been patiently correcting now for a few days. The statement that X "LEADS TO" Y IS a statement in causality Kane you stupid HUMP! "Stupid HUMP?" Is that how you refer to the people that publicly kick your ass all over a few newsgroups? Like I told you, it's possible for "leads to" to refer to cause, but there'd be supporting commentary. While "leads to" more often refers to correlations. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...on&btnG=Search Read'm and weep stupid, then post your scientific evidence concerning the risk to non spanked children of developing sociopathy. R R R R R R Here they are, a comin' right atcha. And I'll do it again and again. Check my posting history. The search is on your words in your claim, exactly: Results 1 - 10 of about 3,510,000 [PDF] Correlation Of The Vector Magnetocardiogram With The Vector ... File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat X-,. b). Y-,. and c). Z-. leads of the VMCG during the time-normalized QRS-complex in 200 normal. subjects. The correlation between the spatial vector ... ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel2/1028/13060/00595721.pdf?arnumber=595721 - Similar pages [PDF] Lead iodide platelets: correlation between surface, optical and ... File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat determination of the direct bandgap energy of Lead iodide crystals”,. Appl. Phys. Lett. 69 (13) (1996) 1930. y = -64.784x + 5.2029 ... ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/7884/21759/01009306.pdf - Similar pages cross correlation proc(0) = crosscorr(x,y,lead,lag); local ncov,pcov,cov,ccor,i; x=x-meanc(x) ... _pdate = ""; title("Cross Correlation"); bar(seqa(-lag,1,rows(cov)),ccor); endp; business.auburn.edu/~hzk0001/crosscorr.prc - 3k - Cached - Similar pages JSTOR: Univariate Residual Cross-Correlation Analysis: An ... As discussed by Haugh and Box [11], the cross-correlation between the u's ... The contention that X leads Y is supported at significant level a if = m 2 2 ... links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0191-9016(197907)1%3A2%3C141%3AURCAAA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-B - Similar pages JSTOR: An Alternative Method of Determining Correlation ... THE AMERICAN NATURALIST Formulae involving moments about 0 as origin4 lead directly to x, - (x-- ), (x -3/), o(, o( (-), and (,+Y) r,,^ may be determined by ... links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-0147(192903%2F04)63%3A685%3C181%3AAAMODC%3E2.0.CO% 3B2-R - Similar pages Ion channel citation list for keyword '' Neuropeptide Y inhibits chromaffin cell nicotinic receptor-stimulated .... Distinct kinetics of cloned T-type Ca2 + channels lead to differential Ca2 + entry ... http://www.ionchannels.org/showcitat...t.php?keyword= - 147k - Cached - Similar pages Henon Map Correlation Dimension Initial conditions of x = 0, y = 0 will suffice but lead to a few spurious ... To calculate the correlation dimension, one would normally generate a time ... sprott.physics.wisc.edu/chaos/henongp.htm - 12k - Cached - Similar pages [PDF] The Confusing Terminology of Correlation File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML their names can lead to confusion. Correlation: This is defined as. } {. } ,. corr{. XY. E. Y. X. =. Covariance: This is defined as ... http://www.ws.binghamton.edu/.../EE5...relation.p df - Similar pages [PDF] Spatial Vectorcardiography in the Wolff- Parkinson-White Syndrome ... File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat Parkinson-White Syndrome: Correlation. with Epicardial Mapping Findings. KEWAL K. TALWAR, PER BLOMSTROM, ... The orthogonal leads X, Y, Z were recorded at ... http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi...1984.tb05648.x - Similar pages Math Forum - Ask Dr. Math Your conclusion is that teacher attire (X) leads to an increase in student performance (Y). But perhaps a teacher with high-performing students feels ... mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/65494.html - 7k - Cached - Similar pages \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Oh, and Ken. I aced my social statistic college coursework. I like to tease Doan by pretending to be as stupid as he is. I'd do it again, and he'll fall for it again. Don't bother to try and lie to me about social science terminology. I took both my major and minor in fields that required a great deal of productive work in statistics. Doan likes to pretend a single error in chart reading (obviously an oversight) indicates the one that errs is "STUPID." You've seen, though won't admit it, how "STUPID" I am in dealing with his impotent manipulative lying. The first step towards a recovery from stupid lying syndrome, I'm told, Ken is the admission that you have a problem. So, say after me: "I KEN PANGBORN, am a STUPID liar." See, now we can get somewhere, possibly. Or didn't you say it? Maybe you'd prefer to scream "DIE DIE DIE," instead, eh? Kane |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|