Liberal Forum

JohnnyYou » 06 Jul 2025, 11:35 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 11:35 am

I would go rainbow in support of LGBTQ rights.

Hungary sure did shove their collective dick up Victor Orbans butt with 100:K+ showing up in defiance of his order that the Budapest Gay Pride march would not be allowed to happen.

You are on the wrong side of humanity..   Do you have any idea how ancient Homosexuality is?  It was the norm in Ancient Greece for the teachers to have sex with thier same sex students.  Child Grooming was Yuge in the Toga Party Age.  When I learned it I was like.. Oh my, maybe I don't want to have strictly Platonic relationships.

Your Christian values got hijacked thousand of years ago..  I just saw a video that anyone that said the kingdom comes in your head and you don't have to jump through the preachers hoops to achieve divine superiorty and eternal life in taxation without representation.

We have a few homosexual families in our circle we dearly love. Two female couples have raised very succesful children who are all in succesful careers and heterosexual relationships.

It certainly doesn't make it right or normal...
 

*Huey » 06 Jul 2025, 12:56 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 12:56 pm

more nonsense.  Hit bong early today?

Tiny,

Not playing to stupid..

You just sit there...

Blackvegetable » 06 Jul 2025, 1:57 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 1:57 pm

Tiny,

Not playing to stupid..

You just sit there...

And most of us on the thread are laughing our asses off at you.

when you participate in a night pinnacle landing on an Alaska mountain at 7000 feet with a 20 knot cross wind and hanging out the door on a monkey strap let me know.

ROG62 » 06 Jul 2025, 1:47 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 1:47 pm

brown's mad skiing skills....  

Yeah...but Bv won the faceplant gold.     
 

*Huey » 06 Jul 2025, 2:00 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 2:00 pm

And most of us on 

Exclude the idiots.

How many remann?

Blackvegetable » 06 Jul 2025, 2:57 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 2:57 pm

Exclude the idiots.

How many remann?

You have been told about editing posts and questions from born and convicted liars? Try again.  And iced ove pinnacle to the equation, Contolled Condotions:

And most of us on the thread are laughing our asses off at you.

when you participate in a night pinnacle landing on an Alaska mountain at 7000 feet with a 20 knot cross wind and hanging out the door on a monkey strap let me know.

 

*Huey » 06 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm

You have been told about editing posts 

Victim,

You have been told that if your posts aren't responsive, I'm not going to bother.

Blackvegetable » 06 Jul 2025, 3:51 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 3:51 pm

Victim,

You have been told that if your posts aren't responsive, I'm not going to bother.

Either A, B, C, or D.

Let me break this down for your dumb ***. You see the 4 options to the question? Every option includes your definition, but only one is an example of survivorship bias. Your definition was half assed. Like all of your content.

When a sample fails to reflect "mortality" in the population being examined.

or

"Sampling error"

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors

Vegas » 06 Jul 2025, 3:55 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 3:55 pm

Either A, B, C, or D.

Let me break this down for your

Priceless!


To give some backstory here, I was exposing Veghead's stupid article about his usual presidential rankings. He was using a fallacy that is called "survivorship bias." Now, I don't expect people to know offhand what that means. However, given how much Veghead brags that he has superior aptitude in stats...and math in general, there was no need for me to define the fallacy. He should already know since it's a common term in stats. So, what did he think it meant? He took it literally and thought it meant dead presidents. LOL! The bolded quote at the end proves how intellectually superior he is. 

I am left with no choice, but to publicly embarrass him. 

@Blackvegetable I will never let you live this gem down. 
 
 

Blackvegetable » 06 Jul 2025, 3:58 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 3:58 pm

Priceless!

To give some backstory here, I was exposing Veghead's stupid article about his usual presidential rankings. He was using a fallacy that is called "survivorship bias." Now, I don't expect people to know offhand what that means. However, given how much Veghead brags that he has superior aptitude in stats...and math in general, there was no need for me to define the fallacy. He should already know since it's a common term in stats. So, what did he think it meant? He took it literally and thought it meant dead presidents. LOL! The bolded quote at the end proves how intellectually superior he is. 

I am left with no choice, but to publicly embarrass him. 

@Blackvegetable I will never let you live this gem down. 

Either A, B, C, or D.

Let me break this down for your dumb ***. You see the 4 options to the question? Every option includes your definition, but only one is an example of survivorship bias. Your definition was half assed. Like all of your content.

When a sample fails to reflect "mortality" in the population being examined.

or

"Sampling error"

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors
 
 

Blackvegetable » 06 Jul 2025, 3:51 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 3:51 pm

Victim,

You have been told that if your posts aren't responsive, I'm not going to bother.

You have been told in the past there is NO CONTEXT where you have the ability to make me a victim.  Nod.

*Huey » 07 Jul 2025, 5:02 am » wrote: ↑

07 Jul 2025, 5:02 am

You have been told in the past there is NO CONTEXT where you have the ability to make me a victim.  Nod.

That's clearly false, judging by the record.


 

Blackvegetable » 06 Jul 2025, 2:57 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 2:57 pm

Exclude the idiots.

How many remann?

'nuff said....  

Blackvegetable » 07 Jul 2025, 6:21 am » wrote: ↑

07 Jul 2025, 6:21 am

That's clearly false, judging by the record.


 

The record is always inaccurately recorded by intellectual additions of time in actual time evolving results are currently evolving each ancestor of the entire food chain native to this atmosphere present conditions geographically evolving in this atmosphere.

Why do people defending character in typecast social scenarios always avoid the terms in genetic time as alive as self evident displacement of their sole time alive now?

Every rotation of the planet actually takes 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4 second intellectual time indexing what evolved against those still evolving forward now.

It is done every annual revolution of the planet around the star each 365.2422 days a year.
then there is the compounding chromosomes in streaming DNA cycles of limiting numbers of ancestors alive daily here per specific ancestral lineage living 24/7, 7 days a week, every year forward from now.

roadkill » 06 Jul 2025, 2:30 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Jul 2025, 2:30 pm

Yeah...but Bv won the faceplant gold.   

year over year...