MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
PRESUMPTIVE LOGIC (APPLIED EPISTEMOLOGY)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mrs Justice Butler-Schloss (aged 81, just the ticket) has been appointed to conduct a post-Saville, Rolf Harris enquiry. She will certainly find a whole Bayesian slew of stuff since she also conducted the enquiry into the Middlesborough child anus-rapists and found there was a whole slew of them as well. That was just after somebody else discovered there was a whole slew of devil-worshippers interfering with children in Lancashire.

However, just to make myself thoroughly unpopular, I should point out that -- given fairly accepted norms about sexual selection -- it is right and proper that powerful, popular, famous (and rich) people are entitled to be cut more sexual slack than the rest of us. In other words a sixteen year old can be a legitimate sexual target for Jimmy Saville ... then. So there will be a whole slew of them to find now.

Yes, 'the norm' is constantly on the move. So, for example, sleeping with a 'girl' who was drunk was considered OK in my day (even a matter for boasting and congratulation) but might easily attract a rape charge now. I do not say this is wrong, but it would be wrong to charge me with rape now for what I did then. I would be going to prison with a whole slew (no, a whole generation) of now middle-aged 'boys'.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

She's gone.....

She underestimated that she could not "independently" investigate Sir Michaels role....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10956213/Downing-Street-backs-Baroness-Butler-Sloss-despite-brothers-link-to-spy-paedophile-cover-up.html
Send private message
Tilo Rebar


In: Sussex
View user's profile
Reply with quote

It will be interesting to see who is chosen by the establishment to replace the departed Justice Butler-Schloss. I expect that they will pick someone less obviously biased, but I think it would be better just to leave it to the police to run the investigation, as they have much experience in cold cases.

Whoever does an honest investigation is sure to find lots of creepy crawlies once they start upturning a few stones. I also think that lots of senior establishment figures will be taking a surprise early bath over the next few months, to mitigate embarrassment further down the line.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Well, it turns out that our doubts about the Norris case (see earlier posts) were completely correct. Panorama tonight has made it clear beyond all doubt that he is innocent.

One fresh AE point that did arise was that the investigating officer, a detective chief superintendent, had previously been investigating the Shipman case. This means a) that he is individually predisposed and b) his seniority precludes second guessing from other police officers.

Watch the half-hour programme here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04vs09g#programme-broadcasts
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Judges have banned Bayes Theorem, from being used as a defence in most types of cases, unless an expert can be sure of the exact numbers. So the Norris defence team wont be allowed to use it.

Which is bad news...for Norris as he was convicted on mistaken probability rather than hard evidence.


http://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/oct/02/formula-justice-bayes-theorem-miscarriage
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Watch out for the 'Dolphin Square' case. As reported this week, somebody has come forward to tell of a high-level (MP's, judges etc) child-sex ring operating out of this swish Westminster apartment complex. Two points arose: the police spokeperson said, "We are looking for witnesses. Please be assured, if you were molested, you will be believed." This is a disgraceful statement and an open appeal to liars and fantasists of all stripes. It is nearly as bad as the old police attitude, "Don't bother, we won't believe you, you snivelling little wretch."

The second point, and the one that got it into the news bulletins, was that "at least three murders of young boys had taken place" according to this same witness. It is just about believable that the conspirators would be careless enough (or over-confident enough) to allow a youth to know other youths were involved but it is stretching all credulity -- except that of chastened rozzers trying to demonstrate this time they're on the case -- that a youth would find out about three murders. One? I suppose that's just about possible. Two? Three.... no, now we're in Titus Oates territory.

The same reports indicated that another block of flats was being investigated, again on the say-so of a single individual victim. But what really is the likelihood of such a thing? One accepts that sex abuse of children took place on a considerable scale, and that this certainly extended to small groups of individuals at, say, a children's home -- or even several linked children's homes -- but we have not so far had a 'ring'. This is somewhat critical in AE terms because, as we know, there is all the difference between individuals acting in concert and a conspiracy.

The point about MP's, judges etc is that they do not ordinarily come into intimate contact with youths and therefore are in need of, as it were, a 'ring'. Does this mean that such rings are inevitable or does it mean (given the risks) that they are impossible?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The latest on Dolphin Square, from the Daily Mail:

[John] Mann [MP for Bassetlaw] has said previously: "All those 22 names are worthy of investigation by the police. The evidence against half of them is very compelling.

"Some of them could definitely be prosecuted and I believe several of them were definitely child abusers.

"I have been given many other names although at present I do not believe the evidence is sufficiently strong to pass them on the police."

That last paragraph is important. This bloke has been given information presumably in his role as an MP which is not quite credible enough to pass on to the police even though he is in the middle of a process of doing just that. What can possibly qualify for such a lowly status? Internet chat? Bloke met in saloon bar. The mind slightly boggles. Full story:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2883012/Scotland-Yard-probing-five-VIP-paedophile-rings-Labour-MP-hands-dossier-naming-six-serving-politicians-Lords.html
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

This notion of pedophile rings of upper-class toffs is a recurrent fantasy of the Left. There's never any truth to it and those who pander in this material ought to be greeted with derision and regarded as lunatics.

Meanwhile, the real "pedophile" ring is ignored by the politicians of the elitist Left.



The left must peddle this myth of pervasive, pedophilia in order to distract from the reality: Crime and deviancy are most often found among the leftist constituency---those upon whom the Leftist elite rely to secure their social position: That is, the poor, the uneducated, and the barbaric.

White people become Leftists so that they may feel superior to other white people. It is all too easy for them to believe that persons representing the stodgy conservatism of the old elite are demons underneath; to see themselves as angels, Leftists must believe in devils.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ishmael wrote:

The left must peddle this myth of pervasive, pedophilia
Ishmael wrote:
Leftists must believe in devils.


If you substitute the term christian, for leftist, you would be closer to the truth.........about how and why these panics develop.

Devils come in many forms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orkney_child_abuse_scandal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Giordano

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Goldschmidt#Revelation_of_sexual_abuse
Send private message
Roger Stone


In: conclusive
View user's profile
Reply with quote

We do have an interesting point which arises from the more alarmist allegations made during the Orkney, Rochdale, Nottingham and Cleveland investigations: if the extent of child sexual abuse suggested is really as high as some crusaders were suggesting (25%) then it is not perverted or deviant behaviour; it is normal.

Any behaviour pattern which was observed in a quarter or more of the whole population, would be recognised as normal; that is to say, common enough to be considered a normal part of life.
Send private message Send e-mail
Grant



View user's profile
Reply with quote

I think we are living through the 21st Century version of the Salem witch trials - we've already seen a number of outrageous miscarriages of justice. One possible solution is to introduce a US-style statute of limitations. But I suppose none of our craven politicians would dare suggest it for fear of the press.
Send private message
Grant



View user's profile
Reply with quote

to see themselves as angels, Leftists must believe in devils.


Right on, Ishmael. It's been obvious to me for ages that human beings need religion. And if they don't believe in God people invent secular religions complete with creation myths and angels and devils. But why is this? I think it's because societies with religion are more united and more resolute. It's easier to make your mind up if you have religion. It's also easier to get your soldiers to fight for you if they believe in something.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Grant wrote:

And if they don't believe in God people invent secular religions complete with creation myths and angels and devils.


And if people don't believe in Gods, they replace this with a single God, and the older gods evolve into angels, devils, messengers and saints.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I'm not sure whether Bayes Theorem applies to this but it is rather interesting:
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/bradford-city-stadium-fire-new-evidence-casts-more-doubt-on-verdict-bradford-fire-was-accident-10213925.html

It's a claim that the Bradford Stadium fire wasn't an accident. But there's also various rushes-to-judgement. Worth a read.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Just wrote this....

From the character of Sherlock Holmes comes the famous axiom,
Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
Which sounds very good. But overlooked is the fact that, whatever remains, if improbable, is still probably not true.

Whatever the solution you've developed for any particular problem, in so far as it remains improbable, it remains doubtful, regardless of the number of alternatives eliminated or the evidence accumulated. A probable solution is always preferable to an improbable one and it's on this basic principle that Applied Epistemology is founded.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Jump to:  
Page 3 of 4

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group