PICS VIII: 10% LARGER THAN PICS VII

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think this could be a fun meme alteration. And it's easy.

Nice bait and switch!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

In the "obvious fact is obvious" department:

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

[Don Coyote]

This will be my go to response to every fucker that gets pissed about flag burning.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

This will be my go to response to every fucker that gets pissed about flag burning.

[Trivial]

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Milo's butthurt is the tastiest butthurt. A man who has literally made a career out of shitting on other people is complaining because his feelings were hurt.

[Freeky]

Actual CD that exists.

[Freeky]

[minuspace]

So, like, ethically, I wonder what would be sufficient to prove his argument is sound...

?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

So, like, ethically, I wonder what would be sufficient to prove his argument is sound...

?

Not very much. Most likely, little more than the minimal academic rigor of a person attempting to measure the efficacy of a single treatment differential. If he has that level of academic rigor, which seems sadly unlikely.

[minuspace]

So, like, ethically, I wonder what would be sufficient to prove his argument is sound...

?

Not very much. Most likely, little more than the minimal academic rigor of a person attempting to measure the efficacy of a single treatment differential. If he has that level of academic rigor, which seems sadly unlikely.

Well, then science should shift the burden of proof upon itself and make him the subject of an experiment to test his hypothesis.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

So, like, ethically, I wonder what would be sufficient to prove his argument is sound...

?

Not very much. Most likely, little more than the minimal academic rigor of a person attempting to measure the efficacy of a single treatment differential. If he has that level of academic rigor, which seems sadly unlikely.

Well, then science should shift the burden of proof upon itself and make him the subject of an experiment to test his hypothesis.

Sample size of one = no statistical power.


If I'm going to be a science pedant, I might as well ruin ALL the jokes.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

[minuspace]

So, like, ethically, I wonder what would be sufficient to prove his argument is sound...

?

Not very much. Most likely, little more than the minimal academic rigor of a person attempting to measure the efficacy of a single treatment differential. If he has that level of academic rigor, which seems sadly unlikely.

Well, then science should shift the burden of proof upon itself and make him the subject of an experiment to test his hypothesis.

Sample size of one = no statistical power.


If I'm going to be a science pedant, I might as well ruin ALL the jokes.

The domain is different, ethics is like maths, governed by reason and logic (hypothetically).  so science could make an exception, in the name of the principle of non contradiction.  Praised be The Natural Philosophy.

[Ed.  And ethics does not preclude experimenting with statistically significant data-sets]