I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

[Siggie]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

So how many children are you willing to wreck to prove my hypotheses?

Another illustration of irrationality. (You also didn't respond to my criticism of your argument at all. You just moved on to something else, in typical Kanadahye fashion. Dancing the side-step again.)

When did I advocate wrecking any children? Seeking evidence for you hypothesis need not involve wrecking any children. You are creating a false dichotomy where none exists.

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Another illustration of irrationality.

When did I advocate wrecking any children? Seeking evidence for you hypothesis need not involve wrecking any children. You are creating a false dichotomy where none exists.

Going around in circles I see.... like a dog chasing its own tail. You haven't answered how you would go about proving or disproving my hypotheses without assuming people remember their childhood as it was lived and/or assuming they are telling the truth. You can't measure abuse since physical wounds heal but mental wounds don't.

[Siggie]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Going around in circles I see.... like a dog chasing its own tail. You haven't answered how you would go about proving or disproving my hypotheses without assuming people remember their childhood as it was lived and/or assuming they are telling the truth. You can't measure abuse since physical wounds heal but mental wounds don't.

We're only going in circles because you're ignoring what I'm saying and are just repeating yourself or fallacy hopping.


Science/logic lesson #2345232: You don't disprove a hypothesis.

-----

Since I (unlike you) actually answer questions... (Note I already answered this question... you just missed it because you don't actually read and think about what I say.)

What you're proposing simply involves comparing two groups. If what you're hypothesizing is correct, then at the very least there would be a difference in the incidence of abuse between homosexual and heterosexual populations. This is a good starting point. You don't need to expose anyone to abuse and the self-report (measurement error) is part of the noise and that would be present in both groups (you haven't said you expect it to be a problem among homosexuals and not heterosexuals) so it doesn't present an internal validity problem.

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Science/logic lesson #2345232: You don't disprove a hypothesis.

Actually, you don't PROVE a hypothesis. You can only find supporting evidence. All you need is one data point to disprove it.

[Siggie]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Actually, you don't PROVE a hypothesis. You can only find supporting evidence. All you need is one data point to disprove it.

You ignored my entire post providing the explanation THAT YOU REQUESTED, to focus one tiny thing you thought you could try to twist into an error on my part. Alas, you're wrong still.

I said you don't disprove a hypothesis. YOU said prove.

Besides, your understanding is incorrect. What you're thinking of is the very basic logic arguments where you say something like "all swans are white" and then you'd only need one black one to disprove. You're applying this incorrectly because you're not actually thinking critically about what you're applying it too.

Let me illustrate:
Smoking increases the risk of cancer as a hypothesis, for example, is not disproved by finding one person who smoked and didn't develop cancer.

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Ignored my entire post providing the explanation YOU REQUESTED, to focus one tiny thing you could try to twist into an error on my part.

I said you don't disprove a hypothesis. YOU said prove.

Besides, your understanding is wrong. Let me illustrate:
Smoking increases the risk of cancer as a hypothesis, for example, is not disproved by finding one person who smoked and didn't develop cancer.

Blah, blah, blah, blah.... smoking has physical aspects as does cancer. One person who smoked and didn't develop cancer isn't a reliable data point.

[Siggie]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Blah, blah, blah, blah.... smoking has physical aspects as does cancer. One person who smoked and didn't develop cancer isn't a reliable data point.

All that blah blah blahing distracted you from actually reading my post. How does that change what I said?

And you're using "reliable" incorrectly. How would that data point not be reliable? Are you doubtful of whether they smoked or whether they have cancer?

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

All that blah blah blahing distracted you from actually reading my post. How does that change what I said?

And you're using "reliable" incorrectly. How would that data point not be reliable? Are you doubtful of whether they smoked or whether they have cancer?

It would be valid data but not a reliable data point as you would need more than a single instance to support a widespread study on effects on overall population.

Anyways, the moral of the story. I'm right. You're wrong. The end.

[Siggie]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

It would be valid data but not a reliable data point as you would need more than a single instance to support a widespread study on effects on overall population.

Valid data and data point are the same thing. I never suggested any study based on a single individual. You have still not made any valid criticism to the study I proposed at your request. I even illustrated it with a concrete example.

Anyways, the moral of the story. I'm right. You're wrong. The end.

I find this hilarious given that I spanked your ass at every step.

Does this abrupt conclusion mean that you're giving up? Where is Sip to translate these claims of victory?

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Valid data and data point are the same thing.

Depends on language. I was referring to data point as collective data that creates a point which disproves the hypothesis.

Does this abrupt conclusion mean that you're giving up? Where is Sip to translate these claims of victory?

No, it means I'm bored. Sip is like your alter ego so that wouldn't exactly be a viable judge.