Posts: 8267
Threads: 47
Joined: September 12, 2015
Reputation:
42
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 14, 2023 at 2:11 pm
(January 13, 2023 at 4:22 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: (January 13, 2023 at 9:13 am)GUBU Wrote: No I don't think it is bad, it demonstrably is bad. None of his findings are replicable.
But... his findings have been replicated:
Quote:https://www.owl232.net/papers/guncontrol.htm
Fifteen surveys, excluding the one discussed in the following paragraph, have been conducted since 1976, yielding estimates of between 760,000 and 3.6 million defensive gun uses per year, the average estimate being 1.8 million.
I'm sorry but if you don't even understand the basics of the scientific method you shouldn't even be taking part in this discussion. The "paper" you link to starts with its conclusion and works its way back from there. It is literally anti-science.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Posts: 30974
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 14, 2023 at 3:11 pm
It so nice we have all these guns for the millions of so called self defense acts otherwise our homicide rate would skyrocket compared to our peer nations. Oh wait.
Long time ago, I thought those same studies and arguments had merit. They don't stand up to legitimate scrutiny, they are bad science.
They don't even pass the giggle test.
Posts: 2020
Threads: 133
Joined: July 26, 2017
Reputation:
5
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 16, 2023 at 11:09 am
(January 13, 2023 at 5:54 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: (January 13, 2023 at 4:22 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: But... his findings have been replicated:
‘Defensive gun use’ is not the same as ‘lives saved by guns’.
Boru
So if no other study even tried to estimate the number of lives saved by guns each year in the US... shouldn't we go with the Gary Kleck's study that estimated it to be around 300'000? The burden of proof is on somebody to demonstrate that Gary Kleck's study is wrong, that, if you control for various biases, you get a different number. Since nobody demonstrated that, the burden of proof stays on people who claim Gary Kleck's study is wrong.
Posts: 45963
Threads: 538
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
109
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 16, 2023 at 11:18 am
(January 16, 2023 at 11:09 am)FlatAssembler Wrote: (January 13, 2023 at 5:54 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: ‘Defensive gun use’ is not the same as ‘lives saved by guns’.
Boru
So if no other study even tried to estimate the number of lives saved by guns each year in the US... shouldn't we go with the Gary Kleck's study that estimated it to be around 300'000? The burden of proof is on somebody to demonstrate that Gary Kleck's study is wrong, that, if you control for various biases, you get a different number. Since nobody demonstrated that, the burden of proof stays on people who claim Gary Kleck's study is wrong.
That other studies haven’t been done is not a valid reason to accept a flawed methodology.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Posts: 2020
Threads: 133
Joined: July 26, 2017
Reputation:
5
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 16, 2023 at 11:24 am
(January 16, 2023 at 11:18 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: (January 16, 2023 at 11:09 am)FlatAssembler Wrote: So if no other study even tried to estimate the number of lives saved by guns each year in the US... shouldn't we go with the Gary Kleck's study that estimated it to be around 300'000? The burden of proof is on somebody to demonstrate that Gary Kleck's study is wrong, that, if you control for various biases, you get a different number. Since nobody demonstrated that, the burden of proof stays on people who claim Gary Kleck's study is wrong.
That other studies haven’t been done is not a valid reason to accept a flawed methodology.
Boru
I thought it is. I thought that's how burden of proof works in science.
Posts: 29584
Threads: 116
Joined: February 22, 2011
Reputation:
159
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 16, 2023 at 11:51 am
(January 16, 2023 at 11:09 am)FlatAssembler Wrote: (January 13, 2023 at 5:54 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: ‘Defensive gun use’ is not the same as ‘lives saved by guns’.
Boru
So if no other study even tried to estimate the number of lives saved by guns each year in the US... shouldn't we go with the Gary Kleck's study that estimated it to be around 300'000? The burden of proof is on somebody to demonstrate that Gary Kleck's study is wrong, that, if you control for various biases, you get a different number. Since nobody demonstrated that, the burden of proof stays on people who claim Gary Kleck's study is wrong.
That's not how burden of proof works and is essentially an argument from ignorance. "Nobody has proved it wrong, therefore it is right."
Posts: 2020
Threads: 133
Joined: July 26, 2017
Reputation:
5
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 16, 2023 at 12:22 pm
(January 16, 2023 at 11:51 am)Angrboda Wrote: (January 16, 2023 at 11:09 am)FlatAssembler Wrote: So if no other study even tried to estimate the number of lives saved by guns each year in the US... shouldn't we go with the Gary Kleck's study that estimated it to be around 300'000? The burden of proof is on somebody to demonstrate that Gary Kleck's study is wrong, that, if you control for various biases, you get a different number. Since nobody demonstrated that, the burden of proof stays on people who claim Gary Kleck's study is wrong.
That's not how burden of proof works and is essentially an argument from ignorance. "Nobody has proved it wrong, therefore it is right."
If you think it's enough to complain about the flaws in methodology to discard a study, read up on conspiracy theorists (perhaps The Mad Revisionists - the conspiracy theorists who claim the Moon doesn't exist) and consider the matters again. You cannot manufacture the truth by discarding the evidence. That's not how science works. Gary Kleck's study is, until you point to a better study, the best data we have.
Posts: 10930
Threads: 29
Joined: December 8, 2019
Reputation:
14
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 16, 2023 at 1:00 pm
Nope the flaws in his study are enough by themselves to dismiss his conclusion.
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Posts: 2020
Threads: 133
Joined: July 26, 2017
Reputation:
5
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 16, 2023 at 1:00 pm
Do you also think people on Internet forums are right to reject my study suggesting that the probability of the pattern of the first two consonants in river names in Croatia being 'k' and 'r' appearing by chance is between 1/300 and 1/17, without any attempt to calculate that probability themselves?
Posts: 45963
Threads: 538
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
109
RE: Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?
January 16, 2023 at 1:09 pm
(This post was last modified: January 16, 2023 at 1:10 pm by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
(January 16, 2023 at 12:22 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: (January 16, 2023 at 11:51 am)Angrboda Wrote: That's not how burden of proof works and is essentially an argument from ignorance. "Nobody has proved it wrong, therefore it is right."
If you think it's enough to complain about the flaws in methodology to discard a study, read up on conspiracy theorists (perhaps The Mad Revisionists - the conspiracy theorists who claim the Moon doesn't exist) and consider the matters again. You cannot manufacture the truth by discarding the evidence. That's not how science works. Gary Kleck's study is, until you point to a better study, the best data we have.
I agree that it’s the best study we have, but only by the virtue of being the only study we have. That doesn’t mean Kleck’s conclusions are valid.
Suppose I were to conduct a study - the only one, mind you - of facial expressions in South American rodents and reached the conclusion that these expressions meant that capybaras were thinking about crucifixion imagery in the works of Kierkegaard.
Since no one has refuted this study, let alone conducted one of their own, should we accept my conclusion as a working hypothesis?
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
|