ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Pretty sure we're talking about Britain in this thread.
Your post has been reported for an attempt to derail it.
Bad bananahead!
Bad!
British rape gangs
- Thread starter JudgeRightly
- Start date
Your post has been reported for an attempt to derail it.
Bad bananahead!
Bad!
VladtheDestroyer
Well-known member
Yet the article Anna posted, which you just stupidly agreed with, doesn't provide new data. It just argues that we can't know what the real stats are.
Worth the watch:
Full video:
Full video:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Yet the article Anna posted, which you just stupidly agreed with, doesn't provide new data. It just argues that we can't know what the real stats are.
Yet taking an article that uses flawed methodology to arrive at an arbitrary, attention grabbing figure at face value is...intelligent? Again, this is why I don't get any of my news from social media platforms or talking heads that affirm preconceived biases because invariably, there's little to no truth in it and hyperbole galore.
Yes, there have been scandals and as I've said already, Rotherham was a high profile case that made headline news and rightly so, so there is no need to blow figures out of proportion.
VladtheDestroyer
Well-known member
No Arthur. There is a lot you are not understanding here. Let me try to explain it to you another way.
In the 1980s, when gays started the AIDS epidemic, doctors in the USA were trying to figure out how many homosexual men had AIDS. It's their job to do stuff like that. But they only had a limited amount of data at first, because the epidemic had just started. So they pulled datasets from a few specific communities that were known for homosexual activity (namely in New York City, San Francisco and Orlando IIRC.). And they used this data to give a nationwide figure as to how many gays likely had AIDS. Because they wanted to know the infection rate, so they could determine whether or not this problem would go away on it's on.
They determined it would not. And this year, the US is going to have to spend 32 billion dollars (yes billion) on AIDS research and treatment. Domestically.
Would you say their methodology was flawed?
Last edited:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Well, if you think that "gays started the AIDS epidemic" then there's a lot you aren't understanding yourself. Not sure why you've gone on that particular rabbit trail exactly but I suggest you educate yourself on that alone.
On the actual topic - if a claim is made using methodology that doesn't stand up to scrutiny - as in this case, then it can be dismissed unless it can be corroborated with concrete evidence. So you, or anyone else are welcome to provide some? Go ahead and I'll concede the matter. Just a heads up though, by concrete evidence I mean just that - not talking heads or links to YT, X or social media.
VladtheDestroyer
Well-known member
The reason why you don't understand why I am bringing this up is because didn't even bother to familiarize yourself with the actual methodology cited in the report posted in the OP, which you have constantly been objecting too. Right? Otherwise the correlation would be clear to you.
You don't understand what you are talking about. You don't even care enough to try. You are just babbling like an adult infant.
Last edited:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Oh, I understand clearly enough thanks which is why I dismiss the article in the OP for the exaggerated bunk that it is, the same as I do with any other outlandish claim that fails to stand up to scrutiny. But if you have any concrete evidence to back up this claim, then by all means bring it to the table.
VladtheDestroyer
Well-known member
You understand enough to be sent to the pit of Hell, Arthur. Would you ever be interested in understanding more than that?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Oh, okayyy then.
VladtheDestroyer
Well-known member
That's really sad.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Not really.
Almost as sad as assuming someone you don’t know is not a Christian because he dares to disagree with you …
VladtheDestroyer
Well-known member
I've noticed a trend lately, that people who support evil, increasingly are arguing that we can't know things.
We can't know if and why there is a high crime rate
We can't know if men are men and women are women
We can't know who the True God is
We can't know the real reason why Trump gave a porn star $130,000
That we can't know truth, we can't know right and wrong. Things like that. So for these people, statements of reality -truths about the way things really are, end up being replaced with a narrative.
The truth is, simply knowing someone is a person -can tell you a lot about that person.
If someone is a man, I know he is a man. He isn't Batman! He is just a man, like me.
So you and Arthur (in a different thread) are pushing a narrative, that I can't know what the truth is, that I can't know who "the real Arthur" is, because my only interactions with him have been here on this forum. But the reality is, there are men and women on opposite sides of the world, who have meet each other on web forums and eventually began planning their weddings, before they even meet each other face to face. Before they even spent a single hour alone in a room with that person. And they made the decision to spend the rest of their lives together.
Because people aren't mysteries. We are in fact, all quite relatable to one another. And we are predicable in the ways the Bible teaches us we will be. So if told my neighbor something like "You shouldn't be drinking so much all the time." And he said "Back off buddy, you don't even know me!" he's not making a valid point, he is just trying to make an excuse for his drunkenness.
I think when you wrote this, you knew it was a lie. Because there is no truth in it. All you are doing is pushing a shameful, fantasy narrative. Arthur isn't some misunderstood, daring crime-fighter like Batman, bravely fighting against the Christian men on this forum who are trying to explain to him how the world works. He's just the average guy who is evil and hates truth and doesn't want to people to know that his narrative -his ideology produces bad fruit.
Last edited:
VladtheDestroyer
Well-known member
You are just speaking mindless blibber-blabber.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Okay, I'll just pick up on this bit. Dude, I've been on this forum for twenty years, from back in its heyday, when I could go to work in the morning and by lunchtime there'd be forty plus threads bumped with all sorts of lively discussions going on. During that time, I've had many invigorating discussions and debates with people of all manner of beliefs and political viewpoints including conservative Christian men (𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯). I've had respect for and made friends with a few (vegascowboy springs instantly to mind) because they could properly debate and make their points clearly, without recourse to petty insults, facile assumptions of character based on disagreements and ad homs. So, if you think I'm trying to be some ridiculous figure with a hatred of Christianity and Christians then you're way off the mark.
No, what I will speak out against is extremism, be that political, religious or else as I consider it to be one of the banes of society. So, you might consider it to be railing against Christianity when I argue against having a patriarchal society as some propose or the persecution and execution of homosexuals, enforced marriages for couples having sex outside of wedlock with no possibility of divorce or holding children as young as five as accountable for their actions as an adult and executing them. AFAIC, it would be wrong 𝘯𝘰𝘵 to argue against such extreme positions as they reflect the 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘴 of actual Christianity.
You're not trying to explain to me how the world works, you're trying to explain how you 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 the world should work which is an entirely different thing altogether. I already know how it works thanks, I've lived in it for 54 years and learned lessons, both good and bad, through the experience of life itself. My days of youthful ignorance and naivety are long since gone so you're welcome to your opinions about a narrative I haven't actually got or that I'm on the way to hell (yeah, haven't heard that before) or some such.