Barko wrote:Coward and weak? (right - fuck you too)
Oh, nice. Very nice. See, I told you you are hostile? Try arguments for a change. Or an anger management therapy.
Barko wrote:For not wanting to go to libraries etc. to satisfy you?
No, for not going to libraries to check out whether what you're saying is true, for yourself. And you don;t have to go to a library. Just use Mr. Google, as I did.
Barko wrote:If I had the staticstics next to me I would post them (and then you would probably start to question them),
I would only question them if they came from an unconfirmed hobby-site. But you know, questioning statistics and sources is something *everybody* should do. If not, we turn into sheep, who believe anything we've been told. That has even lead us (you) into a war in Iraq.
Barko wrote:but you can´t expect me (or anyone) to invest hours of their spare time.
I don't expect you to invest hours. Surely you can find evidence that backs up your claims quickly, if you're so sure.
Barko wrote:To ME it´s common knowledge (and to Rob and most people).
What's "most people"? Wikipedia describes those kind of constructions as 'weasel words':
Wikipedia wrote:Generalization by means of grammatical quantifiers (few, many, people, etc.), as well as the passive voice ("it has been decided") are also part of weasel wording. Generalization in this way helps speakers or writers disappear in the crowd and thus disown responsibility for what they have said.
* "People say…" (Who are the people who say it?)
* "I heard that..." (Whom did you hear it from? How, where and when did they learn of it?)
* "Experience shows that..." (Whose experience? What was the experience? How does it demonstrate this?)
* "Few of those who knew the truth have spoken up for …" (Which people knew the truth and should have spoken up?)
* "It has been decided that..." (Who decided?)
* "It turns out that..." (How, and why, did it "turn out" that way?)
* "Popular wisdom is/has it, that..." (Can this be clarified? When it was first used, might help, even though we might not find the person any more, who first used it).
In the following phrases, an indication of where or how the stories started would have removed the weaseling effect:
* "It has been mentioned that..." (Who mentioned it?)
* "Rumour has it that..." (Where was this rumour published or spread? Who is included in the group that is just about anybody?)
* "There is evidence that..." (What evidence? Where is it? What are the details?)
* "A source states that..." or "There is an accusation that..." (What is the source? Is it reliable?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_wordsAnd to YOU it's 'common knowledge'? So if YOU say there are purple elephants, that means there ARE purple elephants?
Barko wrote:But let´s just say that you´re right and I´m wrong and I´m sorry that I expressed my opinion on this subject without having statistics to back it up with, but it´s the first time anybody in any forum has required scientific evidence from me.
Then you have been visiting forums that are either about totally non-political or non-scientific subjects, or those fora were populated with the kind of 'sheep' I was referring to.
Barko wrote:Btw, do you also demand that from Rob and the other forum members when they express an opinion? If so, fair enough. If not, then why shall I?
If Rob or any other member makes a claim that requires back up, I'll ask for back up. I made a statement about Christianity in the US en I backed it up. Why can't you do the same?