Ken's checking accounts KANE'S HERO speaks

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Greegor wrote:
Mis-attributed to me. These look like Kane's words.
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.
Kane wrote
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.
Thank you Donald L. Fisher, for acknowledging your identity.
I didn't say that Doan knew a specific name, Greg.
So what name I know, Kane?
I don't read minds.

Yet you claimed that I know you name?
Sure.

So what name is that?

Keep straining. You'll get that **** all out of your mouth eventually.

Oops! More **** coming out of your mouth again! ;-)

You just can't keep your story
straight, Kane?
Because I won't verify it publicly my story isn't straight?

Because you claimed I know it, STUPID!

Yes. I did claim that.

How does that obligate me to verify it?

So you make a claim that you cannot verify?

Do you answer every question of mine about your claims?

Yes! I did!

0:-

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Oh, and Ken. I aced my social statistic college coursework. I like to
tease Doan by pretending to be as stupid as he is.

Hihihi! So can he only "pretending" when he EXPOSED his STUPIDITY!

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.

And that is why Kane claimed that using dummies in car crash studies
makes those studies correlational!

So then, you have not answered my question concerning that.

Would we have a test that showed injury to adults, or to dummies?

Injuries to dummies, of course!

If injury to dummies is cause to presume the same injuries to humans
then it's causal. If it shows a correlation to injuries to dummies
replicated by injuries to humans then we don't.

Huh?

The research is dummies to dummies...a simulation.

What are they simulating?

That's why so much research results in physics related to nature of
matter and energy can't be truly claimed to be causal.

Huh? So they are correlational?

So, tell us about Quantum Mechanics and String Theory.

Hihihi!

And about the psychological effects on dummies from physical injury and
trauma.

Hihihi!

Now, a final question, you will dodge:

If we take dummies in the form of human children, and subject them to
all the various forms of spanking under all the various possible
circumstances, will we have conducted a causal research model on
children or dummies?

on dummies!

Show how replacing children with dummies would produce the true causal
relationship that would indeed show that the dummies developed
hhhmmmmphh behavior 'sociopathy.'

I hear some such research has been conducted that did indeed show the
'sociopathy.'

I had not heard there were dummies.

There are two here, though. One Doan and one Princess Kendra.

0:- You be well, yah hear?

Hey, the dads-rights addy is back. Thanks for the capture. Apparently
someone has been removing it while Ken writes his response...as least in
other threads.

LOL!

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Oh, and Ken. I aced my social statistic college coursework. I like to
tease Doan by pretending to be as stupid as he is.

Hihihi! So can he only "pretending" when he EXPOSED his STUPIDITY!

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.

And that is why Kane claimed that using dummies in car crash studies
makes those studies correlational!

Doan


Damn, I completely forget.

So tell us how the auto crash dummies and the child dummies would
"behave," more or less aggressively due to the various levels of impact.
It seems Ken's claim was about behavior, not about levels of mechanical
injury.

Thanks.

Kane

LOL! Did you forget to take your medication, Kane?

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

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

A google seaceh proves nothing, Kane!

The results do.

That's STUPID!

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

Are you so STUPID? None support you claim. Or are you suggesting that
people read through all 3 and a halft millions hits ????

Nope. Only the ones that show that referring to X leads to Y is used in
correlation studies.

Which one?

Besides, I only was responding to Ken.

And I responsing to you.

Are you answering for him?

No. I will not answer questions that you ask him directly!

Why not, 0;-, let him answer for himself? Can't he?

He did and exposed your STUPIDITY so that we all can have a good laugh at
your expense. ;-)


YOU ARE STUPID!!!


I didn't claim that dummy tests produce behavioral results causally. It
seems you were trying to.

No. I am as stupid as you to that dummies can behave as human.

They show causal relationships for mechanical injury to dummies, nothing
else.

Hihihi! Tell that to the car manufacturers!

The same injuries to humans is inferred. Inference is usually associated
with correlation.

Hihihi! Inference is associated with correlation???

We can see, by collecting some data on actual injuries to human where it
MIGHT apply, but certainly not always, and since the issue here is human
behavior, as in non spanking CAUSES behavior sociopathy in children, a
claim by Ken, we won't be able to use a dummy study.

Who said they can use a dummy study, Kane?

Unless you can show they have behaviors.

Possibly Ken would do that. He'd know a lot about dummies...oh wait, so
do you, coming from a long line of them.

I know you!

The last of which spanked you into this strange behavior you engage in
here.

But you were "never-spanked". ;-)

Doan wrote:

A title asking a question and ended with an exclamation point and no
question mark.

I'd say that deserves a ....

LOL!

Are you attempting to show that x leads to y is used only for causal
relationship demonstration?

You'll find that hard to fly in front of scientists, Doan.

Ken's claim was that the study I posted had to have a title that
referred to cause when it used "X leads to Y," yet we find it also in
samples where that is used in correlation studies.

Thus he is correct had he said, "CAN be causal," but incorrect in his
claim that it IS causal in that title.

Not only isn't it claiming cause, but proof lies in the body of the
material where no such claim is made..

I'm afraid, you and your wife are wrong, Doan.


"Establishing a causal relationship is a more difficult task, because it
requires showing that x leads to y, not vice versa and not from some third
variable."

'More difficult' doesn't mean, never possible. The phrase is used in
correlation studies, just as the folks at OSUokc teach.

You've written them to prove them in error, have you not? You seem to
hold strong views on this matter of Ken being right and my being wrong.
Since OSUokc agrees with me they must too be wrong.

Please don't be stupid and continue to post lies, Doan. Its' obvious you
didn't make a mistake, you deliberately avoid the claim Ken make, and my
comments when refuting it.

I never claimed X leads to Y was never used for finding cause. It's just
that it is also used for finding correlation.

Ken got caught, at best, in a simple thinking error. When confronted
with it he then attempted to lie his way out, just as you are running
interference for him....by claiming exclusive meaning for a phrase that
has more than one meaning.

Doan

Let's just hope it an error on your part. I'd hate to think you would go
to so much trouble to support an error compounded by a lie, by lying
yourself.

0:-




On 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

... you can't be made to testify against the other when we judge you
for your lies, and other social crimes of misdirection.

On the question "X leads to Y," being limited to causal based research
and not being used for correlation studies, since I was called a liar
and "stupid," for claiming it is used for both types of research:


http://www.google.com/search?q=%22x+...&start=10&sa=N

Results 11 - 20 of about 89 for "x leads to y" +correlation. (0.07
seconds)
[PDF]
Some general results concerning the critical exponents of ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
can be reached from x or x leads to y) ... Simon, B.: Correlation
inequalities and the decay of correlations in ferromagnets. Comm. Math.
...
www.springerlink.com/index/Q4113V23H32RV400.pdf - Similar pages

Jan.-Feb 2000
But correlation, per se, does not answer the question of which variable
... because it requires showing that x leads to y, not vice versa and
not from some ...
www.jcpr.org/newsletters/vol4_no1/articles.html - 140k - Cached -
Similar pages

[PDF]
arXiv:cond-mat/0504652 v1 26 Apr 2005
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Note that the correlation function decays algebraically in ... step is
1/2, and therefore the correlation function ... The symmetry x ↔ −x
leads to Y ...
arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0504652 - Similar pages

[PDF]
PROLEGOMENA TO A THEORY OF ORGANIZATION Oskar Morgenstern
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
such that x leads to y leads to z and z is the signal that all previous
acts ... zation are somehow correlated, but the exact nature of the
correlation has ...
qss.stanford.edu/~godfrey/Morgenstern/prolegom.pdf - Similar pages

Mid-American Journal of Business » Blog Archive » Listening to ...
For example, under condition A, X leads to Y. Yet under condition B,
... The company’s data show a strong correlation between effective
problem resolution ...
www.bsu.edu/mcobwin/majb/?p=237 - 77k - Cached - Similar pages

onegoodmove: Faith And Reason
Because there is no correlation between two apparently unrelated
statements. ... The logical validity depends on whether or not x leads
to y. ...
onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2006/07/faith_and_reaso.html - 147k -
Cached - Similar pages

Forum Healthcare For Women
It is not always a simple matter to differentiate between correlation
and causation. ... ie, X leads to Y. Association and time order can be
found in many ...
www.forumhealthcare4women.com/article.cfm?id=48 - 83k - Cached -
Similar pages

[PDF]
Interrupting Inevitability: Teleology, Globalization and Resistance
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
... of singularity as an abstract causal relationship, such that X
leads to Y, and ... forming; what interplay of correlation and
dominance exists between ...
http://www.macalester.edu/politicals...vitability.pdf
- Similar pages
Causal INSIGHTS INSIDE for data mining to fight data tsunami and ...
... y (probabilistic) == in plaintalk "Lack of x leads to y ", because
in the ... 10, 1959, 217-226, his correlation coefficient R between
events is on p. ...
www.matheory.info/hajekit/causrr.txt - 174k - Cached - Similar pages

[PDF]
W P P S
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Shugart 1995 has downplayed the correlation between presidentialism and
democratic ... In the sake of understanding better when X leads to Y
and when it ...
politica.itam.mx/docinves/documentos/WPPS2001_05.pdf - Similar pages

... any apology in the offing, boys, or just more bluster and lies?

It's up to you. It's your credibility not mine.

What would your parents say, Doan? That they didn't spank you enough or
as vigorously as they should?

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Greegor wrote:
Mis-attributed to me. These look like Kane's words.
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.
Kane wrote
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.
Thank you Donald L. Fisher, for acknowledging your identity.
I didn't say that Doan knew a specific name, Greg.
So what name I know, Kane?
I don't read minds.

Yet you claimed that I know you name?
Sure.

So what name is that?
Keep straining. You'll get that **** all out of your mouth eventually.

Oops! More **** coming out of your mouth again! ;-)

You just can't keep your story
straight, Kane?
Because I won't verify it publicly my story isn't straight?

Because you claimed I know it, STUPID!
Yes. I did claim that.

How does that obligate me to verify it?

So you make a claim that you cannot verify?

Choosing not to does not mean that one cannot.

You do it all the time.


Do you answer every question of mine about your claims?

Yes! I did!

No, that is just a lie.

"I did?" Nonsense.

And more than obvious to anyone that has followed your postings.

It's impossible to debate a liar, so I cannot debate you other than by
spending all my time proving you have lied.


0:-

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Oh, and Ken. I aced my social statistic college coursework. I like to
tease Doan by pretending to be as stupid as he is.

Hihihi! So can he only "pretending" when he EXPOSED his STUPIDITY!

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.

And that is why Kane claimed that using dummies in car crash studies
makes those studies correlational!

Doan

Damn, I completely forget.

So tell us how the auto crash dummies and the child dummies would
"behave," more or less aggressively due to the various levels of impact.
It seems Ken's claim was about behavior, not about levels of mechanical
injury.

Thanks.

Kane

LOL! Did you forget to take your medication, Kane?

You have shown in a series of posts now that you cannot debate without
lying to divert and misinform.

It's pointless to attempt to debate you because you opponent is left
with nothing to do but disprove your lies, rather than advance his or
her argument.

You are simply a pathological liar.

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

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

A google seaceh proves nothing, Kane!
The results do.

That's STUPID!

That's stupid to claim someone else's evidence is stupid.

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

Are you so STUPID? None support you claim. Or are you suggesting that
people read through all 3 and a halft millions hits ????
Nope. Only the ones that show that referring to X leads to Y is used in
correlation studies.

Which one?

It only takes one. I've posted more than one. And I've show you evidence
from course study guides from a major university.


Besides, I only was responding to Ken.

And I responsing to you.

Can't you let Ken answer for himself?

Are you answering for him?

No. I will not answer questions that you ask him directly!

A stupid lie?

Why not, 0;-, let him answer for himself? Can't he?

He did and exposed your STUPIDITY so that we all can have a good laugh at
your expense. ;-)

By lying and claiming the title is only possible for cause studies?

No, you are compounding his error, and then his lie. He beat no one.

I am pleased people are getting to watch you two court, and announce
your nuptials though.

YOU ARE STUPID!!!

I didn't claim that dummy tests produce behavioral results causally. It
seems you were trying to.

No. I am as stupid as you to that dummies can behave as human.

Your sentence is unreadable for meaning.

They show causal relationships for mechanical injury to dummies, nothing
else.

Hihihi! Tell that to the car manufacturers!

What would I tell them, what they already know?

As I said before, it doesn't take causal based research to return useful
results.

The same injuries to humans is inferred. Inference is usually associated
with correlation.

Hihihi! Inference is associated with correlation???

Sure.

We can see, by collecting some data on actual injuries to human where it
MIGHT apply, but certainly not always, and since the issue here is human
behavior, as in non spanking CAUSES behavior sociopathy in children, a
claim by Ken, we won't be able to use a dummy study.

Who said they can use a dummy study, Kane?

No one. Metaphor you seem unable to honestly respond to.

Ken is claiming behaviors children are at risk of having if they are not
spanked. He's claimed there is scientific evidence.

He hasn't produced it as I requested....his option.

Unless you can show they have behaviors.

Possibly Ken would do that. He'd know a lot about dummies...oh wait, so
do you, coming from a long line of them.

I know you!

Not as well you think.

The last of which spanked you into this strange behavior you engage in
here.

But you were "never-spanked". ;-)

I never claimed that.

Again you made a contextual lie.

You did claim you were spanked. I hope not too many children that are
spanked turn out as you have.

It's a shame.

"0:-" wrote in message
news:j_6dnY03ivyjGi7YnZ2dnUVZ_rWnnZ2d@scnresearch. com...

http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/Attachment(1).jpg

http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/kensmailorderbride.pdf

I can't help but wonder what the context of these were, if they are what
you claim. What were you talking about that he posted those.

Kane - I rest my case. Look at his page on my bankruptcy.

Ah, then he didn't post your "banking records" sans any other context.

You abuse rationalization. He has repeatedly posted it to Usenet BEGGING
people to access it. He has even (last week) BEGGED some of the Nigerian
SCAM people to use it. Which has drawn some SERIOUS interest from some
banking folks.

Maybe you'll find my speeding ticket there too.

Depends on it being related to his claims about your business practices,
doesn't it?

Jesus Christ man you are one hell of a piece of work!

The SAD part is this all tells you NOTHING and all you can do is
RATIONALIZE IT! And ENDORSE IT!

I asked for clarification. I got it. Not from you, by the way, but from
Moore's post clarifying that it was not an isolated shot of your banking
records, but of your banking records (numbers) within a legal document on
your bankruptcy.

ANd posting them toi USENET????? BEGGIING people to electronic access
it????

So, Ken, you tried to mislead the reader into thinking he had found OUR
actual banking records numbers, alone, and had posted them for some
reason.

And I am curious that when you saw that, you reposted them ourself,
isolating them a bit from the bankruptcy finding.
Hmmm...just curious. And wondering why you need all these enemies.


YOU STUPID little ****! The MOMENT I saw his post those accounts were
CLOSED! Knowing his persistent the little fukker is, I moved the funds to
an entirely different bank. Again knowing his OBSESSION I went so far as to
move them to a bank in another state. Going further KNOWING your HERO'S
obsession the account isn't even in my name! You are a TWIT Kane.

"0:-" wrote in message
news:R5WdnbdrMujaGy7YnZ2dnUVZ_vGinZ2d@scnresearch. com...


Dontcha think posting bank account numbers is
just a bit too much, Kane?
Yes, I do. I wonder who actually did it.
That's because ypou have the IQ of a wallnut KANE!
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.
Yes they ARE! He claims they are "PUBLIC RECORDS!" And he claims
his 1st Amendment RIGHT to post them! That's who you have LINKED
yourself to Kane. Now IRRETRIEVABLY!

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.
Look at his website Kane.
I did. I can't find proof that he posted your bank records.

YOU ARE INCOMPETENT OR A LIAR!

It seems they might have been part of a bankruptcy judgment that he
posted.

Is that true?

Why would you not mention the bankruptcy but the content of the judgment
as though it didn't exist?

Have you ever heard the term "rationalization?" Have you ever been told
that there is a point where a person can take rationalization to such an
extreme that it is considered pathological? Kane - - - you are way PAST
that point here!