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?

"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!

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

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

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

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

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

"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!

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

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