Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ish who wrote (66843)	12/16/1999 10:56:00 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 108807

That is one of the problems, and yes, both do (Brady and NRA)....

To: Ish who wrote (66843)	12/16/1999 11:00:00 AM
From: Rainy_Day_Woman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Ish~ time to dust and remove the cobwebs from the snow blower sigh our first measurable snows, chance again tonight and temps below 30. this one will stick leaving in Jan for a little southern exposure how is the wife doing? and you? foxy

To: Ish who wrote (66843)	12/16/1999 11:25:00 AM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

There's the rub. Opinions are like belly buttons, everyone has one. I bet the answers on what constitutes abuse would be as wide spread as the question of how many drinks are too many. Good point. But are we to eliminate both drinking and corporal punishment because both can be abused? Or do we trust adults to use both responsibly and punish irresponsible use of either?

To: Ish who wrote (66843)	12/16/1999 11:33:00 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

The problem with research on corporal punishment on kids is that researchers can't ethically set up prospective double-blind studies. They can't randomly select a pool of families, and tell one set to spank, and one set not to spank, and then tally up the results at the end of the study. It's just not ethical. So all they can do is interview parents who spank, and parents who don't spank, and then there is the unavoidable problem of selection bias. Without setting up a random, double-blind study, you can never say with complete authority that the pool of parents who spank don't differ significantly from the pool of parents who don't spank. But there's simply no way around it. Ethical researchers have to work with what they have.

To: Ish who wrote (66843)	12/16/1999 7:52:00 PM
From: nihil	Respond to of 108807

Bias and agenda are real problems. That's why any scientific research proposal for funding by a serious research organization is specifically reviewed for bias. Every legitimate research funding agency uses a panel of experts on the specific field to review every proposal. Most proposals are externally reviewed by other experts. The publications of the research staff are reviewed for bias and scandal. Any scientist who hires out to an interested party and publishes or testifies in a biased way is finished as a scientist. You may have seen such paid-for guys in TV drama (the medical expert, for instance). His testimony never counts with scientists or even juries. In science, as in court, there is cross-examination. Most courts rule that scientific evidence is only admissable if it relies on theory generally accepted in the field. I have experience in testifying on economic injury in accidents, wrongful death, environmental cases, and discrimination cases. No "expert" can get away with anything. There are experts on the other side who testimfy and feed their side's lawyers with questions. IMO it simply isn't true that scientists (even social scientists) can lie or publish biased positions. Each scientist gets to do this only once. Then his or her credibility is forever questionable, and he can rarely even sell his soul again.