Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info mods forum | HOMM4: info CTG forum | HOMM5: info mods forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Other Side of the Monitor > Thread: OSAMA Bin Ladin is finally Dead!
Thread: OSAMA Bin Ladin is finally Dead! This thread is 16 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 · «PREV / NEXT»
Corribus
Corribus

Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
posted May 06, 2011 10:18 PM

You shouldn't trust books.  Books aren't peer-reviewed.

Show me peer-reviewed literature, and then we can talk.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted May 06, 2011 10:28 PM

It was from a peer-reviewed study, IIRC.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Corribus
Corribus

Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
posted May 06, 2011 10:39 PM
Edited by Corribus at 22:41, 06 May 2011.

Derived from peer-reviewed literature and is peer reviewed literature are two different things.  Books derived from peer-reviewed literature can be embellished and draw hyperbolic conclusions that would not make it through a rigorous peer-review process.  Especially books geared toward the general public tend to express extreme opinions or otherwise stress the outrageous in order to generate controversy and - obviously - make money.

That's not to say they're all bad or wrong - just that there's no process that checks what is said or concluded for accuracy, and often opinions are not balanced and objective.  Most important, weaknesses in scientific studies are often not pointed out or discussed.

Books can be a good glimpse into what scientists/sociologists/whatever are doing, but there's no substitute for the real thing.  This is even moreso in the case of political or social science, which is rather elastic to begin with.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Elodin
Elodin


Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
posted May 07, 2011 12:03 AM

Pre-publication peer review is overrated. Scientists have as many preconceptions as anyone else and are just as likely to be pushing an agenda or suppressing ideas of others. It is pretty much a coin toss as far as ensuring quality. Stroke the right egos and play to preconceptions and you can get crap published. Have a great paper that goes against what the "establishment" has faith in and you are likely to be declined.

Below is a link to a peer reviewed paper on peer review and a few snippets from the paper.

Clicky

Quote:

‘If peer review was a drug it would never be allowed onto the market,’ says Drummond Rennie, deputy editor of the Journal Of the American Medical Association and intellectual father of the international congresses of peer review that have been held every four years since 1989. Peer review would not get onto the market because we have no convincing evidence of its benefi ts but a lot of evidence of its flaws.
.....

The Cochrane Collaboration, the organization that through its systematic reviews produces the most reliable evidence in medicine and health care, has reviewed the evidence on peer review of manuscripts and of grant proposals. This is its conclusion on peer review of manuscripts: ‘At present, little empirical evidence is available to support the use of editorial peer review as a mechanism to ensure quality of biomedical research’ [2]. And here is its conclusion on peer review of grant proposals: ‘There is little empirical evidence on the effects of grant giving peer review. No studies assessing the impact of peer review on the quality of funded research are presently available’ [3].
....

Thirdly, peer review is largely a lottery. Multiple studies have shown how if several authors are asked to review a paper, their agreement on whether it should be published is little higher than would be expected by chance [11].


____________
Revelation

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Corribus
Corribus

Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
posted May 07, 2011 12:18 AM

As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Elodin
Elodin


Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
posted May 07, 2011 12:21 AM
Edited by Elodin at 01:05, 07 May 2011.

Quote:
As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about.


As usual, I backed up my claims with evidence. I doubt you bothered to look at evidence that refutes your preconceived ideas since you responded so quickly after I posted. Which demonstrates why peer-reviewed articles can turn out to be crap.  


 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Corribus
Corribus

Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
posted May 07, 2011 01:16 AM

I use the peer-review process every day.  I've published papers using it.  I've also been on the reviewing side, and have rejected papers that have had no business being part of the published record as they were written.  I've done this dozens if not hundreds of times.  I know the peer-review process inside and out, and do not need to look at your so-called evidence to know that the process works far more often than it fails.  

Let's see, Elodin.  How many papers have you published?  How many times have you been a reviewer for a peer-reviewed journal?  Speak, please, of the extensive experience you have.  Or are you, as usual, just barfing back stuff you've read on the internet to hide your near-infinite ignorance?

Really, this has nothing to do with the topic at hand.  If you want to get embarassed about your woeful lack of knowledge about science and the scientific process, I suggest you start another thread.  My suggestion was to mvass, and it was only meant to point out that anyone can write anything in a book, and that he might want to check out what a person writes in the primary literature before making a judgement on their work.  You'd know that, if you actually read anything that was written here.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Elodin
Elodin


Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
posted May 07, 2011 02:48 AM

Quote:

....to hide your near-infinite ignorance.....

I know the peer-review process inside and out, and do not need to look at your so-called evidence to know that the process works far more often than it fails.  



You are wasting your breath trying to intimidate me with personal insults.

**shrugs** I merely presented a peer-reviewed paper based on actual studies. You choosing not to read it because the paper does not reflect your preconceived beliefs about the topic hurts me not one bit.

Anyways, back to to topic of the thread. As has been said Ben Laden was well educated as have most terrorist been who have been captured in places where education is widely available. Below is a portion of yet another article discussing this, and it mentions Palestinians, about whom questions have been raised in this thread. The article is by Alan Krueger, whom mvass mentioned.

Clicky

Quote:

Public opinion is one thing; actual participation in terrorism is another. There is striking anecdotal evidence from Nasra Hassan, a United Nations relief worker in the West Bank and Gaza Strip who described interviews with 250 militants and their associates who were involved in the Palestinian cause in the late 1990s. Hassan concluded that “none of them were uneducated, desperately poor, simple-minded, or depressed. Many were middle class and, unless they were fugitives, held paying jobs. Two were the sons of millionaires.”

   In the 1930s, Raper assembled data on the number of lynchings each year in the South and on the price of an acre’s yield of cotton. He found an inverse relationship: when the economy was doing well, the number of lynchings was lower. Raper's work was influential, but it turned out to be flawed.

Claude Berrebi, now of the RAND Corporation’s Institute for Civil Justice, wrote his dissertation at Princeton on the characteristics of Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza Strip who were involved in terrorist activities. For example, he compared suicide bombers to the whole male pop­ulation aged 16 to 50 and found that the suicide bombers were less than half as likely to come from families that were below the poverty line. In addi­tion, almost 60 percent of the suicide bombers had more than a high school education, compared with less than 15 percent of the general population.

Jitka Malecková and I performed a similar study of militant members of Hezbollah, a multifaceted organization in Lebanon that has been labeled a ter­rorist organization by the U.S. State Department. We were able to obtain information on the biogra­phies of 129 deceased shahids (martyrs) who had been honored in the group’s newsletter, “Al-Ahd.” We turned translations by Eli Hurvitz at Tel Aviv University into a data­set and then combined it with information on the Lebanese popu­lation from the 1996 Lebanese Ministry of Social Affairs Housing Survey of 120,000 peo­ple aged 15 to 38.

These deceased mem­bers of Hezbollah had a lower poverty rate than the Lebanese population: 28 percent versus 33 percent. And Hezbollah members were better educated: 47 percent had a secondary or higher education ver­sus 38 percent of adult Lebanese.

This is also the case, apparently, with al-Qaeda. Marc Sageman, a forensic psychiatrist and former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) case officer, has written a book titled Understanding Terror Networks. He found that a high proportion of mem­bers of al-Qaeda were college educated (close to 35 percent) and drawn from skilled professions (almost 45 percent). Research on members of the Israeli extremist group, Gush Emunim, that Malecková and I conducted, also pointed in the same direc­tion. Perhaps most definitively, the Library of Congress produced a summary report for an advi­sory group to the CIA titled, “The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?” which also reached this conclusion—two years before 9/11.

Why are better educated, more advan­taged individuals more likely than others to join terrorist groups? I think of terrorism as a market, with a supply side and a demand side. Individuals, either in small groups or on their own, supply their services to terrorist organizations.

On the supply side, the economics of crime suggests that people with low opportunity costs will become involved in terrorism. Their costs of involvement are lower—that is, they sacrifice less because their prospects of living a rich life are less. In other domains of life, it is those with few oppor­tunities who are more likely to commit property crime and resort to suicide.

   Among Palestinians, almost 60 percent of the suicide bombers had more than a high school education, compared with less than 15 percent of the general population.

However, in the case of the supply of terrorists, while consideration of opportunity cost is not irrel­evant, it is outweighed by other factors, such as a commitment to the goals of the terrorist organi­zation and a desire to make a statement. Political involvement requires some understanding of the issues, and learning about those issues is a less costly endeavor for those who are better educated. I argue that better analogies than crime are vot­ing and political protest. Indeed, better educated, employed people are more likely to vote.

On the demand side, terrorist organizations want to succeed. The costs of failure are high. So the organizations select more able participants—which again points to those who are better educated and better off economically.

One of the conclusions from the work of Laurence Iannaccone—whose paper, “The Market for Martyrs,” is supported by my own research—is that it is very difficult to effect change on the supply side. People who are willing to sacrifice themselves for a cause have diverse motivations. Some are motivated by nationalism, some by religious fanati­cism, some by historical grievances, and so on. If we address one motivation and thus reduce one source on the supply side, there remain other motivations that will incite other people to terror.

.....

The evidence suggests that terrorists care about influencing political outcomes. They are often motivated by geopolitical grievances. To under­stand who joins terrorist organizations, instead of asking who has a low salary and few opportunities, we should ask: Who holds strong political views and is confident enough to try to impose an extrem­ist vision by violent means? Most terrorists are not so desperately poor that they have nothing to live for. Instead, they are people who care so fervently about a cause that they are willing to die for it.


 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
DagothGares
DagothGares


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
posted May 07, 2011 08:00 AM

Quote:
‘If peer review was a drug it would never be allowed onto the market,’ says Drummond Rennie, deputy editor of the Journal Of the American Medical
Oh, yeah, this sounds like a rational and scientific statement.

Let's get some science on in this thread!
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
shyranis
shyranis


Promising
Supreme Hero
posted May 07, 2011 12:16 PM
Edited by shyranis at 12:19, 07 May 2011.

Hm... so the gist of that last Corribus post is that Elodin is doing exactly to peer review what Elodin posts Athiests do with anti-Christian sites?

Shoe? Other foot?

Am I right?

Edit: What's more, much like the common accusation (sometimes this does actually happen too) of athiests hijacking non-religious threads to post things from anti-religious sites, this seems to be happening now with things from anti-science sites? Again, form of a question, just wondering.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.

Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Mytical
Mytical


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
posted May 07, 2011 01:33 PM

We do not need yet ANOTHER religious debate.  Lets keep it on topic.

We may never know what exactly happened, because if you ask a dozen eyewitnesses to anything..you will normally get a dozen different answers.  Even from people trained to observe.  Now generally there will be a common thread, and we can surmise pretty decently what happened, but as for exacts..not being there we will only have second, thrid, fourth (etc) handed tales.

As for that..I want you to try an experiment.  Gather about 15 people in a circle.  Start by telling the person on your left 3 things.  That person has to wait about 2 minutes, then tell the person on their left..and so on..until it reaches back to you.  9.9 times out of 10 you will not recognize what it ends up as.

I digress however.

A person's death, regardless who they are, should not be celebrated.  Relief can be expressed, people can greive for the things that person took from them..but celebrating a person's death is a bit macabre.

I celebrate no man or womans death, not even Osamas.  Unless that person asks for a wake..then I would. Just as I want a wake for when I go.  Again .. I digress though.

I understand a lot of peoples feeling of relief..I do. A lot of people finally got justice, and it is a good thing.  Personally, I'd rather have him in some prison like the old Alcatraz (spelling).  However, you know that his people would have done whatever it took to get him released..and I think this was the only recourse possible.  I am not happy about it, I do not celebrate because of it.  While I am proud of the Seal team, it saddens me that a man had to die.

Even if that man was Osama.  If that makes me 'unpatriotic' because I am not dancing in the street, so be it.  Death..is nothing to celebrate.
____________
Message received.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Elodin
Elodin


Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
posted May 07, 2011 01:37 PM

Quote:
Hm... so the gist of that last Corribus post is that Elodin is doing exactly to peer review what Elodin posts Athiests do with anti-Christian sites?

Shoe? Other foot?

Am I right?

Edit: What's more, much like the common accusation (sometimes this does actually happen too) of athiests hijacking non-religious threads to post things from anti-religious sites, this seems to be happening now with things from anti-science sites? Again, form of a question, just wondering.


Why are you poking at me? I am not anti-science, nothing I have posted is anti-science, and no site I have linked to is anti-science.
In fact **I** am the one who referenced studies about peer review.

The paper I linked to that points out the flaws inherent in pre-publication peer review is written by "deputy editor of the Journal Of the American Medical Association and intellectual father of the international congresses of peer review that have been held every four years since 1989." The paper references studies on the issue. I suggest you actually read the paper and that you do research on the peer review yourself.

Now, if you want to further discuss the issue of peer review start another topic

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
shyranis
shyranis


Promising
Supreme Hero
posted May 07, 2011 02:17 PM
Edited by shyranis at 14:13, 08 May 2011.

Quote:
Now, if you want to further discuss the issue of peer review start another topic


Now that is perfectly sensible.

Edit: And I apologize for singling you out explicitly, you were egging on Corribus as was Mvass so really I should have called them out as well. Just did not have the time to really add those other points.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.

Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Corribus
Corribus

Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
posted May 07, 2011 04:18 PM

Quote:
In fact **I** am the one who referenced studies about peer review.

Correction: you referenced an editorial, which relies on a lot of fallacious reasoning and offers a solution that is so ridiculous that it can hardly be called a solution at all.  And even if it WAS a scientific paper, that STILL doesn't PROVE anything, which of course you'd understand if you knew anything about the scientific process or scientific philosophy.

Aside from that, the fact that this editorial made it into a peer-reviewed journal pretty much undermines the point you were trying to make in the first place - that is, that peer-review prevents minority or unpopular opinions from become part of the scientific record.  If that were true, this editorial would have never made it past peer-review, since an overwhelming majority of scientists know, first-hand, that peer-review works in the MAJORITY of cases.

By the way, when I asked you what YOUR experience is with peer-review, all I heard was

<<crickets chirping>>

so I guess that answers that.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Elodin
Elodin


Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
posted May 07, 2011 06:28 PM
Edited by Elodin at 18:31, 07 May 2011.

@ Corribus

I'm not interested in getting into a pissing contest on who has the better credentials or who has published more papers. That is neither helpful nor reflective of the truth of what I have said or the truth of the studies I have referenced.  Indeed, the attitude that whoever has the better credentials is correct is one of the reasons the studies show that peer review often fails. The argument that "my credentialmals is better than ur credentialmals so I is right and you is wrong" is fallacious and quite frankly idiiotic.

No, "Classical Peer Review: an empty gun" is a paper, not an editorial. The paper I linked to (which you admitted that you dismissed before you read) is from the Breast Center Research journal. Everything in it is peer reviewed. Immediate rejection due to preconceived beliefs, such as you admitted that you did, is one of the reasons the paper gives as to why peer review often fails and demonstrates that scientists are no more objective than anyone else and often stick to their preconceived notions rather than examining all of the evidence. Everyone sees the world through the shaded glasses of their preconceptions and scientists are no exception.

Quote:

Breast Cancer Research publishes selected research, proceedings and collections of thematic reviews as supplements. All articles published in supplements are subject to peer review and are free to access online. The journal also publishes supplements containing meeting abstracts.



The paper is not an editorial. The paper gives the results of the author's studies.

Clicky
Quote:

"Classical peer review: an empty gun"[1] by Richard Smith is a study which is focused on medical review but which applies to all scientific disciplines.
 


Classical Peer Review: an empty gun

Rennie discusses several studies and says, "Multiple studies have shown how if several authors are asked to review a paper, their agreement on whether it should be published is little higher than would be expected by chance." Now, you can say, "Nuh, uh, he is a liar and all the authors of the studies are liars" if you want to.

I'll remind you of my initial comment about peer review:

Quote:

Pre-publication peer review is overrated. Scientists have as many preconceptions as anyone else and are just as likely to be pushing an agenda or suppressing ideas of others. It is pretty much a coin toss as far as ensuring quality. Stroke the right egos and play to preconceptions and you can get crap published. Have a great paper that goes against what the "establishment" has faith in and you are likely to be declined.



My opinions are backed up by multiple studies. If you wish to continue to discuss peer review start another topic please.

Quote:

“Today, nothing is more important to the  future and credibility of science than liberation from the gravity-driven universe of prior theory. A mistaken supposition has not only prevented intelligent and sincere investigators from seeing what would otherwise be obvious, it has bred indifference to possibilities that could have inspired the sciences for decades.”
---David Talbott and Wallace Thornhill, Thunderbolts of the Gods


____________
Revelation

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Fauch
Fauch


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted May 07, 2011 07:36 PM

you aren't as good when you try to defend the bible.

maybe for the reason you yourself said :

Quote:
Indeed, the attitude that whoever has the better credentials is correct is one of the reasons the studies show that peer review often fails


and sounds like corribus starts argumenting like you usually do in religion thread?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Salamandre
Salamandre


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
posted May 07, 2011 08:42 PM

Except that credentials without precise link or proof are as good as the quoting the bible. Maybe it is true, maybe not, what we know?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
baklava
baklava


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
posted May 07, 2011 11:49 PM

Combo breaker.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
xerox
xerox


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
posted May 08, 2011 12:41 AM
Edited by xerox at 00:42, 08 May 2011.

While I agree with that Usama had to die and was to dangerous to live, the American bloodlust following his demise was terrifying and heartbreaking to see.

It just feels weird that the newspaper wrote stuff like "He's going to hell!!!!11" and people were getting drunk over it.

I guess it is a cultural difference though, as I can honestly not see that happen here at all.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Elodin
Elodin


Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
posted May 08, 2011 02:39 PM
Edited by Elodin at 14:41, 08 May 2011.

Ding Dong!! The Wicked Witch is Dead!!!

The fictional land of Oz was terrorized by a wicked witch. When the Wicked Witch was slain the munchkins sang and danced in the street!

Myths and modern fairy tales recount the tales of struggles with fantastical monsters that are symbolic of the monsters that really exist in our world. Such a monster was Osama bin Laden.

Bin Laden murdered thousands and was planning mass murders for the upcoming anniversary of 9/11. He was a real life super-villain and was slain by a team of real life heroes. His reign of terror has ended and it is only natural to feel joy that his reign of terror is over and to celebrate that. A great evil has been vanquished!
____________
Revelation

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 16 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.1094 seconds