Read on Twitter
EVIDENCE, thread
Theft is fraud (criminal law). Imagine a bank, gold is missing: what goes next?
Liberals: Only in 1 bank? Not important! Show evidence for every bank!
Criminal Law: a public treasure (votes, gold etc) is missing? If YES start a f**ing criminal investigation. https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/1328889512664182785">https://twitter.com/DanScavin...
Theft is fraud (criminal law). Imagine a bank, gold is missing: what goes next?
Liberals: Only in 1 bank? Not important! Show evidence for every bank!
Criminal Law: a public treasure (votes, gold etc) is missing? If YES start a f**ing criminal investigation. https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/1328889512664182785">https://twitter.com/DanScavin...
When I criticised Eric for abusing the notion of evidence (in Darwinian tautological metaphysics) it& #39;s because Darwinists do a constant disservice to the foundations of logic.
Not surprisingly, they don& #39;t get proof/evidence in criminal context. https://twitter.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1329855278464999426">https://twitter.com/EricRWein...
Not surprisingly, they don& #39;t get proof/evidence in criminal context. https://twitter.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1329855278464999426">https://twitter.com/EricRWein...
To summarise
1 We can& #39;t prove a crime without conclusive evidence
2. We can& #39;t find conclusive evidence without criminal investigation
3. We shouldn& #39;t start a criminal investigation because we don& #39;t have proof
Cyclical thought, reminds you of something? https://twitter.com/_benoux_/status/1227668312848523264">https://twitter.com/_benoux_/...
1 We can& #39;t prove a crime without conclusive evidence
2. We can& #39;t find conclusive evidence without criminal investigation
3. We shouldn& #39;t start a criminal investigation because we don& #39;t have proof
Cyclical thought, reminds you of something? https://twitter.com/_benoux_/status/1227668312848523264">https://twitter.com/_benoux_/...
My prediction was that the fall of "evidence of Darwinism" will start when AI software will make better predictions (from a black box) without the need of any Darwinian metaphysics (of Origin). But still, brainwashed Darwinists will continue "that& #39;s proof of Darwin& #39;s Origin!"
But I never anticipated that the Darwinian foundation of logic in metaphysics of naive materialism would be an impediment to distinguish criminal law (from civil law).
A severe "evidence blindness" don& #39;t even let them distinguish criminal negligence from fraud.
A severe "evidence blindness" don& #39;t even let them distinguish criminal negligence from fraud.
Evidence-Based Magical Thinking: the evidence-based decisions presume something that doesn& #39;t exist, evidence-based evidence.
Evidence come from procedures that filter them. There is no evidence without a filter picking signal from noise. Filter is mechanical equivalent of bias.
Evidence come from procedures that filter them. There is no evidence without a filter picking signal from noise. Filter is mechanical equivalent of bias.
Both medical & legal practice absorbed 100s of years of experience & keep something in common: start with SCREENING.
What is screening? It& #39;s a method to collect evidence that tolerates (not excludes) further study of many false-positives. Screening test is NOT a diagnostic test
What is screening? It& #39;s a method to collect evidence that tolerates (not excludes) further study of many false-positives. Screening test is NOT a diagnostic test
Similarly in criminal law it is easy to become suspect and get investigated (just if you happen to be in the wrong place in the wrong time). A criminal investigation starts with *reasonable suspicion* that a serious fraud is taking place.
Older thread: https://twitter.com/_benoux_/status/1326951915721289730">https://twitter.com/_benoux_/...
Older thread: https://twitter.com/_benoux_/status/1326951915721289730">https://twitter.com/_benoux_/...
Reminder
a) Evidence is not fact (= true)
b) Evidence can be weak or strong
c) Evidence implies another thing: a judge
d) The only way propaganda works is by propagating evidence (filtered by an authority)
Evidence from Mar 16, 2018. Remember? https://twitter.com/_benoux_/status/974702179276771331">https://twitter.com/_benoux_/...
a) Evidence is not fact (= true)
b) Evidence can be weak or strong
c) Evidence implies another thing: a judge
d) The only way propaganda works is by propagating evidence (filtered by an authority)
Evidence from Mar 16, 2018. Remember? https://twitter.com/_benoux_/status/974702179276771331">https://twitter.com/_benoux_/...
