nullBolt wrote:
Give me a functional solution to the problem of "testosterone", then.
Feminism, but I suppose you're not going to like that answer.
nullBolt wrote:
If I come into your shop and take a dump on the floor and then you try to kick me out, I can't say, "Hey, I've got a right to fair trial! You might've seen me dump on the floor, but it doesn't count until I've been in the shop for long enough that I can claim squatter's rights!" That's not how it works, Walrus.
You weren't even willing to wait until the dump had taken place in this example, you're just for throwing people out as they enter the door of your shop.
nullBolt wrote:
Economic growth is meaningless for anyone except the very rich.
Isn't that a bit leftist of you?
nullBolt wrote:
Correlation gives significant evidence to check for causation, though.
Especially when there's some sort of factor at work that we can observe (in this case, the culture of migrants in regards to women).
Or are you going to say something like, "Well, standing near radiation emitters
seems to increase the risk of cancer, but correlation does not imply causation!"?
Walrus, I just find it hilarious that there's no evidence that will ever satisfy you. You do understand that, right? Your cognitive dissonance between what reality is and what you want reality to be is hurting you so much that you constantly increase what amount of evidence is required until nothing is good enough. Nothing would
ever be good enough. If I brought out peer-reviewed statistics from a Swedish university that conclusively proved third world immigration increased rape rates you'd say it was wrong for "x" or "y" reason and tell me to get more evidence. No evidence will ever be good enough for you.
Here's a quote of me, in this thread, agreeing that North African immigrants have a higher rate of incidence of rape:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:"A poor choice of phrasing"? You were wrong, and now you're trying to backtrack to save face. You're also attributing motive to someone (in this case the Swedish government) without providing evidence of your claim.
Getting a bit desperate there, Almighty. Clinging onto whatever lifeline you can possibly have regarding this. What other reasons could the very left-wing pro-immigration Swedish government have for removing ethnicity from statistics? Do tell.
Now you're claiming that the left-wing government was the one which removed ethnicity from the report, and yet in the
2005 report used by Gatestone to support their claim the fact that immigrants from North Africa and their offspring have a higher incidence of crime actually explicitly says that's the case on page 35. From 2006 to 2014 the government was centre-right, so blaming this percieved shift of yours on the left is clearly not correct.
