Reminders: Things We All Know But Which Tend To Get Lost

[quaddriver]

I'm sorry Quaddiot, but as I have refuted your points using stats from the source you used (but didn't link to) there seems little point in reposting them. If you cannot accept that what you said was at best ill considered, at worse pure bullshit, then why should I be bothered to repost them?

Everyone here has seen how you shot yourself i the foot innumerable times here, shooting more holes won't make your gait any less wobbly..

You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.

Its a hell of a wordy way for you to admit your assertions were wrong. perhaps it works here. It doesnt elsewhere.

[quaddriver]

ok, dipshit syncophant it is.

I'm leaning more toward you being a childish crybaby whining over being called a liar. Grow the hell up.

You still refuse to acknowledge that your usage of population growth is meaningless.

hey grimmy? go fuck yourself. you are a liar and therefore close to human filth. THAT statement I will stand by. Man up puss.

[Grim Reaper]

Its a hell of a wordy way for you to admit your assertions were wrong. perhaps it works here. It doesnt elsewhere.

Grow up. Seriously. You are acting exceptionally childish.

You were proven wrong. Repeatedly. Yet you keep saying you were right and calling us childish names when you get called out on your web of lies.

hey grimmy? go fuck yourself. you are a liar and therefore close to human filth. THAT statement I will stand by. Man up puss.

Fuck off quad. Grow the hell up if you want to be taken even halfway seriously.

[Gob]

I'll give it one more stab at getting honesty out of Quaddy,..

and worse yet, rudimentary investigation shows that the Austrailian, UK, new zealand and US populations are experiencing positive growth rate due to births. Oz, much more so than the US.

Fertility rates...

123 United States 2.06 2011 est.

139 United Kingdom 1.91 2011 est.

157 Australia 1.78 2011 est.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... 7rank.html

Which country has the highest birth rate Quaddy?

[quaddriver]

I'll give it one more stab at getting honesty out of gobby,..

and worse yet, rudimentary investigation shows that the Austrailian, UK, new zealand and US populations are experiencing positive growth rate due to births. Oz, much more so than the US.

2009 List by the CIA World Factbook

112 Australia 1.2
129 United States 0.98
132 New Zealand 0.94
157 United Kingdom 0.47


Which country has the highest population growth Gobby?

[Joe Guy]

quad, even though I've seen you do it so very many times, I still find it difficult to believe that you continue to attempt to explain how right you are about things that you have been proved to be wrong about beyond a doubt.

But you are entertaining in an increasingly sad kind of way.

Take care.

Maybe you should write about quad vehicles or something.

And not argue.

[Grim Reaper]

Which country has the highest population growth Gobby?

One more time Quad.

Population Growth means births plus deaths (any and all) plus immigration plus emigration.

Stop using population growth. It's a meaningless statistic that does not support your argument at all. It's pure garbage and you know it.

[Gob]

and worse yet, rudimentary investigation shows that the Austrailian, UK, new zealand and US populations are experiencing positive growth rate due to births. Oz, much more so than the US.[/size]

Fertility rates...

123 United States 2.06 2011 est.

139 United Kingdom 1.91 2011 est.

157 Australia 1.78 2011 est.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... 7rank.html

If you cannot face up to your own words Quaddy, don't call anyone here a liar.

[quaddriver]

and worse yet, rudimentary investigation shows that the Austrailian, UK, new zealand and US populations are experiencing positive growth rate due to births. Oz, much more so than the US.[/size]

Fertility rates...

123 United States 2.06 2011 est.

139 United Kingdom 1.91 2011 est.

157 Australia 1.78 2011 est.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... 7rank.html

If you cannot face up to your own words Quaddy, don't call anyone here a liar.

If I wanted to include population growth due to immigration as well, I would have included it. But I didnt. births-deaths, as I have said what? 4 times now? or shall we pretend I didnt? that, would be a strawman.

[Grim Reaper]

If I wanted to include population growth due to immigration as well, I would have included it. But I didnt. births-deaths, as I have said what? 4 times now? or shall we pretend I didnt? that, would be a strawman.

Population growth, by it's very definition, includes immigration and emigration in addition to births and deaths.

Country Comparison :: Population growth rate

The average annual percent change in the population, resulting from a surplus (or deficit) of births over deaths and the balance of migrants entering and leaving a country.

The numbers you've given, as defined by the people who gathered those numbers, contradict the definition that you want to use. Just another lie that you're clinging to.

[Gob]

and worse yet, rudimentary investigation shows that the Austrailian, UK, new zealand and US populations are experiencing positive growth rate due to births. Oz, much more so than the US.[/size]

If I wanted to include population growth due to immigration as well, I would have included it. But I didnt. births-deaths, as I have said what? 4 times now? or shall we pretend I didnt? that, would be a strawman.

For the life of me I cannot see where you included deaths in that quote, you know, the one I have been replying too,
nor where I mention immigration.

[Gob]

Birth rate
This entry gives the average annual number of births during a year per 1,000 persons in the population at midyear; also known as crude birth rate. The birth rate is usually the dominant factor in determining the rate of population growth. It depends on both the level of fertility and the age structure of the population.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... ddefs.html

Anyone see where they exclude immigrants there?

Population growth rate

The average annual percent change in the population, resulting from a surplus (or deficit) of births over deaths and the balance of migrants entering and leaving a country. The rate may be positive or negative. The growth rate is a factor in determining how great a burden would be imposed on a country by the changing needs of its people for infrastructure (e.g., schools, hospitals, housing, roads), resources (e.g., food, water, electricity), and jobs. Rapid population growth can be seen as threatening by neighboring countries.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... efs.html#P

[quaddriver]

Birth rate:
13.83 births/1,000 population (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 149

Death rate:
8.38 deaths/1,000 population (July 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 89

hmmm, I dont need to include:

Net migration rate:
4.18 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 23

Which I clearly said if I wanted to I would, but I didnt.

Given that, just out of curiosity, now that we have shown (again) that the population of the US is increasing due to the birth rate, more correctly stated as birth-deaths which I am now typing for the 6th time, I am curious, what happened to the bulk of the argument that I was soooooo wrong on. You know the one, the one where most or many many many women suffer severe depression? Or the one where it would be impossible for me to encounter many man y many women sho did not suffer depression, or the one where MOST women are treated with SSRI drugs after the fact? That sorta was the main point.

Oh thats right, you were proven wrong so we will ignore it now. Gotcha.

PS: in 2009 (the data year I did choose) there was a live birth every 8 seconds, a dead death every 12 seconds, and an immigrant every 32 seconds. Clearly, the population grew by that birth rate of births-deaths(seventh time), without immigrants, in fact, we seem to give birth to 4 times the babies than we have people cross the line. Is there any other possible way to slice up the fact that my claim our population is growing soley on the backs of uteruses to prove me right?

Give it up.

Clearly, there are no lies here on my part.

[Grim Reaper]

Which I clearly said if I wanted to I would, but I didnt.

The numbers you pulled from the CIA fact book included immigration and emigration. Don't try to wiggle your way out now.

Or the one where it would be impossible for me to encounter many man y many women sho did not suffer depression, or the one where MOST women are treated with SSRI drugs after the fact? That sorta was the main point.

Unless the number of women that you have encountered is in the tens of thousands, you're just posting anecdotal evidence that means nothing.

Oh thats right, you were proven wrong so we will ignore it now. Gotcha.

Keep plugging your ears. It'd be amusing if it weren't so sad.

Here's my question.

Why does it matter to you that some women get depressed after being pregnant? Why are you attacking this concept with such fervor? Why do you care so much?

Oh right. You're just here to stir up shit and cause trouble and then go into childish rants when you people try to engage in rational debate.

[quaddriver]

Unless the number of women that you have encountered is in the tens of thousands, you're just posting anecdotal evidence that means nothing.

didnt I post data that stated the occurance of PPD was about 10% with 1 out of 1000 being severe?
didnt scoot post data that said the occurance of PPD depression was UP TO 20% with a similar mention of 1/1000 being severe.

The answers are both yes, and you read both posts and you know both posts exist, you accept both posts as being true and you knew this before you just hit the enter key, making you yet one more time, a liar. ok ok ok, we believe you, you are a liar. You REALLY dont have to prove it each posts.

Ps: look up the meaning of anecdotal

Here's my question.

Why does it matter to you that some women get depressed after being pregnant? Why are you attacking this concept with such fervor? Why do you care so much?

So you are REALLY trying to convince us you did not read the thread and therefore are just posting out of your ass?

did I not claim at first:

All, without exception, all women I have ever spoken to who have given birth, have revelled in the process, even the long labor natural ones. They also seem to like the pregnancy, especially AFTER.

?

was it not replied to as thus:

I was hit badly with post natal depression. I know many, many, many women who felt exactly the same way.

All I can think is you haven't actually 'talked' to that many women about it.

?

did I not later say:

seriously tho, 'talking about it' is one of the treatments for PPD

brightly, it appears US mileage is better...

?

was I not replied to with:

I am glad such problems are not the norm in the US, unless I actually look at your country's stats and don't believe what you spout

?

did Hen not reply to timster (who defended me) with:

but he was speaking through his arse when he stated:

All, without exception, all women I have ever spoken to who have given birth, have revelled in the process, even the long labor natural ones. They also seem to like the pregnancy, especially AFTER

All I can think is he doesn't have much contact with women. (And I really don't need to be an American to state that.)

?

(I removed the post from Gob which added nothing to the argument, mentioning as it were death rates and pre school registration or whatnot)

did I not reply:

Really? responding to this and another statistical post about PPD, I have to ask, since when did it become accepted or even assumed that PPD lasts beyond a short period of time? this is exactly akin to claiming you will have sharp pain for life because you once had abdominal surgery.

(which we note gob called a strawman, but Lo correctly labelled as an analogy)

and:

PPD is generally short lived and generally treated without medication.

didnt Gob reply with

Utterly wrong. Most PPD is treated with a combination of medication and talk therapy

did I not follow up by showing the statistical durations of BB an PPD? did I not follow up by showing the treatment rates for PPD using therapy and medication?

did hen not reply with:

I harbour no resentment quad. I pointed out your post was full of shit and then you proved it for me.

the answer to all those questions, is of course YES. And you knew this before you posted. Yet you posted. This makes you yet again what?

A LIAR.

Oh right. You're just here to stir up shit and cause trouble and then go into childish rants when you people try to engage in rational debate.

the posts as they occured above, occured in this thread in the same order, and you know that now and you knew that before you hit enter. It is easy to see who 'stirs up shit'. Why all one needs to do is look for the first post that takes an antagonistic tack. Not surprisingly, it appears to be the person who takes said tack first nearly always in the history of not one, not two but 3 BBS. Some trends dont have to be tatooed on your forehead to be noticable do they?

Each point I made as annoted above has been proven and accepted. Even if we now spend 2 pages trying to show that my CIA factbook data proves my point but not as much as Gobs CIA factbook data or whatever it is you are trying to prove.

Summary:

I said clearly that all women I have talked to viewed pregnancy in a positive light.
Hen said I did not talk to women and many many many women do not do so.
I said that PPD is not a lifelong sentence and gave an ANALOGY and that PPD is oft treated with therapy.
I proved that I have an 80-90% chance of encountering a woman who will report a positive experience.
I proved that I might find 10-20% of women who might have some reservations about the experience.
I proved that I will encounter 1 woman out of every 1000 who had a shit bad time.
Hen said I dont talk to many women.
Gob said PPD is most often treated with drugs, and some other stuff about kindergarten.
I proved that of the plethora of treatements available for PPD list therapy as #1 and drugs as less, disproving above
I, Gob and perhaps others have proven that the populations of 4 countries are increasing simply by birth rates outstripping the death rates. I have stated over and over and proven that I do not need consider immigration to find the assertion true.

All these items are true, documented, and read (supposedly) by yourself - recent post notwithstanding. You knew these items to be true, documented and read before you hit enter. This makes you......

[Grim Reaper]

Ps: look up the meaning of anecdotal

You first. Especially since this all started with you posting anecdotal information.

So you are REALLY trying to convince us you did not read the thread and therefore are just posting out of your ass?

I'm trying to get an answer since you refuse to give one. Your quote doesn't answer my question. It doesn't even hint that you understand my question. I'm asking you why you care about this so much, not how this started.

brightly, it appears US mileage is better...

To which you never gave any proof. Which is what really set things off, since you started pointing at birth rates and population growth, which doesn't actually prove how many women are affected by PPD in the different countries.

the posts as they occured above, occured in this thread in the same order, and you know that now and you knew that before you hit enter. It is easy to see who 'stirs up shit'. Why all one needs to do is look for the first post that takes an antagonistic tack. Not surprisingly, it appears to be the person who takes said tack first nearly always in the history of not one, not two but 3 BBS. Some trends dont have to be tatooed on your forehead to be noticable do they?

To which I say, look in a mirror. You started this with your anecdotal information, you continued this by defending your anecdotal information. And you keep on stirring the pot because you can't stand the idea that your extremely small pool of information might not be reflected by larger amounts of data.

I, Gob and perhaps others have proven that the populations of 4 countries are increasing simply by birth rates outstripping the death rates. I have stated over and over and proven that I do not need consider immigration to find the assertion true.

The CIA fact book that you quoted from does include immigration,therefore you brought immigration into the discussion even if you didn't intend to.

Also, you ignore the fact that the number of fertile women is much higher than the number of women who actually get pregnant. Your argument hinges on almost all pregnancies being repeated each year.

Here's some more facts for you. The range of fertility is 15-44 years of age, that equals out to roughly 62 million women. Out of that 62 million, around 2 million are infertile. Out of that 60 million women, only 6 million were actually pregnant last year. What this means is that not every woman has to give birth every year to maintain the birth rate, in fact it's only a small fraction. And the number of women in the fertile range change each year as people enter and leave that range. So not only does a small percentage give birth, but the people actually giving birth changes each year.

Which means that PPD can affect quite a few women and not affect the birth rate.

[quaddriver]

brightly, it appears US mileage is better...

To which you never gave any proof.

Hanging inside fastball swung on......

I clearly stated that all the women I talked to said blah blah blah
Hen clearly stated that many many many women talked to said blah blah blah.
the blah blah blah I reported differs 180* from the blah blah blah hen reported.
Both statements are yes, anecdotal.
But as we have seen above, when challenged I clearly proved that there is an 80-90% chance of my anecdote not only being plausible, but LIKELY
I had also clearly proved that there is a <.1% chance that Hens anecdote is plausible, but not likely.
These items were written as above and were phrased as above and you claimed to have read them therefore you knew they existed before you hit enter.

Therefore the statement you made of "To which you never gave any proof" is clearly a lie and since you knew it to be a lie when you typed it, that makes you.........

....A Liar.

Keep going....there may be some people in Guam that have not gotten the message.....

And to mention, there were a lot of anecdotes in this thread, not the least of the one I originally responded to, which was not only an anecdote, an incorrect one and the author has never been requried to prove it. (and not surprisingly is also NOT the person who started the ad hominem attacks)

Anecdotes, or factual statements, only *I* in this thread have been required to back up the statements. BigRR never was, Hen never was. To be fair, Scooter and Gob also posted data that backed up my statements. when scooter realized his data mimiced my data, to his horror, he stopped posting - he would rather swallow a running chainsaw than aid me. When Gob realized his data (the minor subset that actually ended up beign relevant) proved my point and not his, he abandoned his counter arguments to the point he denies their existence, choosing to instead focus on population growth w.r.t immigration which I clearly stated numerous times I dont care about.

Point being, only I offered any data to back up statements, anecdotal or not - as is usually the case. We have a number of people that are able to go unchallenged as what they say is true, must be true. as Andrew pointed out to perhaps the most egregious of them.

So, YOUR contribution to this thread is exactly what? All statements I made, anecdotal or not, are verfied by outside sources as being factual anecdotes. You know this. You read this. How deep does your dishonesty lie? And again - is this a reflection of your behaviour in the real world?

And in reference to your last statement, which is a non-sequitor strawman. Even if it was needed to add or subtract from this discussion, we know of 3 possibilities:

age appropriate for child bearing women who have ZERO kids (which can be broken down to 1) cant 2) dont want to
age appropriate for child bearing women who have exactly 1 kid and no more
age appropriate for child bearing women who have >1 kid. There are more women with >1 kid than there are with only 1 kid.

Since the conversation deals with parents or more specifically mothers, we can infer that the childbearing process is more favorable than unfavorable (without any other of the previously shown data that states it is) even if we assume that the women with 1 kid stopped because it sucked and no other reason.

[Scooter]

Grim, do you think anyone is taken in by his bullshit? Then let the impotent little thing yelp to his heart's content.

[Grim Reaper]

Therefore the statement you made of "To which you never gave any proof" is clearly a lie and since you knew it to be a lie when you typed it, that makes you.........

Anecdote =/= proof

You have yet to provide any proof of your assertion that the US is better at dealing with PPD than Australia. What you have done is continue to ignore simple questions with misinformation.

Point being, only I offered any data to back up statements, anecdotal or not - as is usually the case. We have a number of people that are able to go unchallenged as what they say is true, must be true. as Andrew pointed out to perhaps the most egregious of them.

Oh poor Quad. How about you drop your martyr act. Just more smoke and mirrors to detract from the debate.

And in reference to your last statement, which is a non-sequitor strawman. Even if it was needed to add or subtract from this discussion, we know of 3 possibilities:

Explain how providing more information about birth rates, which is what this discussion revolves around, could be considered a strawman. Especially since you kept throwing in information that included death, immigration, and emigration, which has nothing whatsoever to do with birth rates.

But hey, keep moaning about how you are being held to a double standard and then applying your own double standard to other people.

age appropriate for child bearing women who have >1 kid. There are more women with >1 kid than there are with only 1 kid.

And? Assuming this is true (since you provide no proof here either), what is the frequency of these pregnancies? How fast do they get pregnant again?

Since the conversation deals with parents or more specifically mothers, we can infer that the childbearing process is more favorable than unfavorable (without any other of the previously shown data that states it is) even if we assume that the women with 1 kid stopped because it sucked and no other reason.

It doesn't infer that though. All it infers is that women get pregnant, and that most of them give birth. It doesn't infer the aftermath of that process. You're trying to read way too much into the birth rate.

[Grim Reaper]

Grim, do you think anyone is taken in by his bullshit? Then let the impotent little thing yelp to his heart's content.

I'm not sure why it bothers me so much, but I have a hard time letting stuff like this go by.