From: stephen@orchid.UCSC.EDU ()
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Response Anaylsis (was: Flame, Studies, Reality)
Date: 11 Oct 1992 23:02:13 GMT
Organization: Santa Cruz
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: orchid.ucsc.edu

I include the following excerpts from different postings.

I said:
    >One need only look at the constant studies that come through
    >talking about health issues- is red wine good or bad? is
    >butter good or bad? is maragine good or bad? is oat bran good
    >or bad? If I can't trust a study that is attempting to
    >determine if oat bran or red wine are good/bad for me, how
    >would I ever trust a study that attempts to answer questions
    >about human behavior.

Mr. Ronzone said:

>Good and bad can range from arbitrary personal value judgements
>to valid medical judgements. You seem to not be able to understand
>that a scientific report, say, on butter comsumption and the
>incidence of various heart diseases is very valid -- but NOT when
>interpreted through three paragrapghs in the local paper.
		                              ^^^^^^^^^^^
But in another response to someone else's posting, Mr. Ronzone
said:

>
>I rely on the recent Newsweek magazine articles on homosexuality,
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>which include a nice set of polls on peoples attitudes on homosexuality.
>

My response to these two different postings by Mr. Ronzone:

Now there is a scientific journal- Newsweek... Yup- they went out
under stringent scientifically controlled conditions and did the
ultimate polling.

Here is my rendition of a Newsweek poller and his pollee (?).

Hello there I from Newsweek Magazine- I'm conducting a poll on
people's views of homosexuality and homosexuals.  May I ask you
some questions?

Well- uh, I am waiting for my husband, uhh, well how long will it take?

Just a few minutes.

Well then, uhh, I guess so, but my package here is heavy..

Poller says;
My question is;
Should homosexuals have protection from job and housing discrimination?

Well now, I've never really thought about that, uhh, well, let's see
uhhh... do we? oh, of course we do how silly of me, well then I 
suppose they should.

Thank you- I'll mark you down as a yes answer.

There you are, a scientific and well controlled survey.

---------my continuing response---------------------------------------
I can only say that if 1) you say that I use newspapers to get my
scientific facts, and 2) Newsweek is a legitimate 'scientific' journal
and you 'rely' on it for information about people's attitudes,
well I'll just leave it to the readers to evalutate.

I have access to 100's of scientific journals- and read them as
much as possible- I do not take as a given information from
newspapers, Newsweek or National Inquirer...

Now on to some other interesting stuff-

Mr. Ronzone said;
>
>Considering that a police officer working with abused children is the
>first line of encounter, I'd say that such a police officer has a much
>better, more accurate, and clearer picture of such a relationship
>that any one else.
>
>
Working with abused childern- suddenly they are social workers, 
rescuing abused childern... I don't think so, it takes a court
order for Joe Cop to go to someone's resident and 'extract' the
childern.  And of course they have all of the qualifications and
competence of a well-trained social worker for abused childern.

"Come one Johnny, don't cry, we're taking you to the police 
station, and you can see our guns, and play with the lights
on our squad cars"....

That officer has only one perception- doing his/hers job, they
have feelings and opinions, but that cannot interfere with
the execution of their job- remove the child if court order
says so...

>
>And to state that someone else is wrong, but that you are just
>too "about it all" to give the "correct" facts is an arrogant
>elitist pig-headed Politically Correct(tm) fascist approach
>given off by intellectually dishonest people cornered by their
>own contradictions.
>
>
Now there a mouthful- look out they are all around us- PC's
Nazi's, communist, etc. etc. etc.

Try the today's world it is very different.