India recriminalises homosexuality

[Tarsonis Survivors]

No it's not. That's a logically fallacious argument.

Really? Mind telling me what the fallacy is?

You're moving the goal poasts. You're saying, the number is one thing, when data comes out showing (and many other studies haven't had it as high as ten) that it's much lower, you just ascribe "Oh people are scared".

Never mind the fact that the Williams Study institute, purposefully tried to account for these challenges.

EDIT: wrong fallacy

[Nervium]

Damn India, why?

Why have thy forsaken us?

[The Scientific States]

That's very bad news.

[Oneracon]

Really? Mind telling me what the fallacy is?

You're appealing to motive. You're saying, the number is one thing, when data comes out showing (and many other studies haven't had it as high as ten) that it's much lower, you just ascribe "Oh people are scared".

Never mind the fact that the Williams Study institute, purposefully tried to account for these challenges.

You can purposely try to account for confounding effects, but it does not change the fact that there are confounding effects.

[The yoshin empire]

No it's not. That's a logically fallacious argument.

I don't direct this solely at you because other do it all the time, but would it kill you to explain how that's fallacious? What you have here is the equivalent of saying "Nuh UH." We shouldn't have to pull teeth to continue a discussion. /rantlet

Dont rant , its unbecoming of a person in your position.oh and the estimates vary quite a bit so 10% of the population could be either to high or to low , depending on who you count as being gay

[Jormengand]

You're moving the goal poasts.

Can you prove that my concern with the validity of your evidence is unfounded?

We'll wait.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

You're appealing to motive. You're saying, the number is one thing, when data comes out showing (and many other studies haven't had it as high as ten) that it's much lower, you just ascribe "Oh people are scared".

Never mind the fact that the Williams Study institute, purposefully tried to account for these challenges.

You can purposely try to account for confounding effects, but it does not change the fact that there are confounding effects.

But when a study accounts for confounding affects, its disingenuous to say there are more confounding effects, just because the results don't support your preconceived notion.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

You're moving the goal poasts.

Can you prove that my concern with the validity of your evidence is unfounded?

We'll wait.

... I did...in that post. If you stopped to look at the data, instead of dismissing it...

[Jormengand]

Can you prove that my concern with the validity of your evidence is unfounded?

We'll wait.

... I did...in that post. If you stopped to look at the data, instead of dismissing it...

Well, no you didn't. You ranted about how they tried to compensate for them not having a clue who was telling the truth and who wasn't, but never showed they succeeded.

[Nation of the Genuine Peoples]

I know this is disconcerting, but I love how everyone reacted with "goddamn it India".

[Tarsonis Survivors]

... I did...in that post. If you stopped to look at the data, instead of dismissing it...

Well, no you didn't. You ranted about how they tried to compensate for them not having a clue who was telling the truth and who wasn't, but never showed they succeeded.

Now, you're appealing to motive. "Oh they must have lied about the data."

But fine, your 10% statistic comes from Alfred Kinsey's reports on sexual behavior. These reports, from the 40's and 50's have been criticized extensively for methodology flaws, and such the results are at best suspect.

The Williams Study, used accepted methodology, and their findings are the more reliable of the two.

[Mistelemr]

The next time a conservative uses the bullshit love it or leave it argument on me for advocating gay marriage, I'll happily encourage them to move to India where they can be homophobic to their heart's content.

[Oneracon]

You can purposely try to account for confounding effects, but it does not change the fact that there are confounding effects.

But when a study accounts for confounding affects, its disingenuous to say there are more confounding effects, just because the results don't support your preconceived notion.

You cannot account for any and all possible inaccuracy if you account for confounding effect.

[Jormengand]

Now, you're appealing to motive. "Oh they must have lied about the data."

It seems perfectly reasonable to conclude that people with a vested interest in people not knowing their sexuality should lie to random surveyors they don't know about their sexuality. You cannot get accurate results on such a sensitive topic through a survey.

The next time a conservative uses the bullshit love it or leave it argument on me for advocating gay marriage, I'll happily encourage them to move to India where they can be homophobic to their heart's content.

There are 76 far better countries to do that in, though.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Now, you're appealing to motive. "Oh they must have lied about the data."

It seems perfectly reasonable to conclude that people with a vested interest in people not knowing their sexuality should lie to random surveyors they don't know about their sexuality. You cannot get accurate results on such a sensitive topic through a survey.

The next time a conservative uses the bullshit love it or leave it argument on me for advocating gay marriage, I'll happily encourage them to move to India where they can be homophobic to their heart's content.

There are 76 far better countries to do that in, though.

By that logic, your 10% statistic is bullshit as well as it was obtained by surveys as well. And thus the true statistic of LGB is unknowable.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

But when a study accounts for confounding affects, its disingenuous to say there are more confounding effects, just because the results don't support your preconceived notion.

You cannot account for any and all possible inaccuracy if you account for confounding effect.

You're stretching here. If you try to make the argument that you can't account for all inaccuracies due to the confounding effect, then the 10% statistic is equally as bogus as the 3% statistic, and then any references to any such statistic is utterly pointless.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

The next time a conservative uses the bullshit love it or leave it argument on me for advocating gay marriage, I'll happily encourage them to move to India where they can be homophobic to their heart's content.

I'm "conservative", and I've made no such argument...largely cause I don't even know what that argument is....but I have no desire to move to India.

[Jormengand]

By that logic, your 10% statistic is bullshit as well as it was obtained by surveys as well. And thus the true statistic of LGB is unknowable.

There's a reason that the 10% is generally considered correct. It is an operable estimate, and no better than that. It might not be true, but it's our best guess.

[Republic of Greater America]

The numerous comments about me is scary...no, I don't wanna spend time in the closet .

[Jormengand]

The numerous comments about me is scary...no, I don't wanna spend time in the closet .

And neither do we, and nor do however many million Indians, or anyone else really.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

The next time a conservative uses the bullshit love it or leave it argument on me for advocating gay marriage, I'll happily encourage them to move to India where they can be homophobic to their heart's content.

No thanks. I wouldn't want them.

[Jormengand]

The next time a conservative uses the bullshit love it or leave it argument on me for advocating gay marriage, I'll happily encourage them to move to India where they can be homophobic to their heart's content.

No thanks. I wouldn't want them.

Just stick a "Please redirect to:" sticker on them. I recommend Iran.

[Ethel mermania]

The next time a conservative uses the bullshit love it or leave it argument on me for advocating gay marriage, I'll happily encourage them to move to India where they can be homophobic to their heart's content.

No thanks. I wouldn't want them.

question oh person of indian decent.

does inida have any type of equal rights statutes?

[Starkiller101]

Back when i first joined this forum i hated gays but over time i learned to accept them. SO shame on you india.

[Flaxxony]

Well it was democratic. So I guess that is all you can really ask for on this stuff.