How can people "know' Marion Jones was a drug cheat when she never tested positive for drugs?
She did "admit" to it as part of a plea bargain, but she would not be the first innocent person to admit to a crime as part of a deal with the justice system.
The less intelligent you are the more sure you are of your opinions. And the more likely you are to be racist and/or a right winger
Hey B, does Conte's precise description of her drug schedule carry any weight with you?
I suppose he could have impugned Maid Marion just to save his own skin which, come to think of it, would be typical for a white guy, wouldn’t you agree?
Jefe in the CO wrote:
Hey B, does Conte's precise description of her drug schedule carry any weight with you?
I suppose he could have impugned Maid Marion just to save his own skin which, come to think of it, would be typical for a white guy, wouldn’t you agree?
.
I certainly do not consider Conte's claims 100% reliable, as you seem to.
As far as people lying or going along with the prosecution, it has been known to happen -- among all sorts of people and both genders. You seem to be unaware of this
Sooooooo 90%, 80%...10%?
And, just a guess, how many times do you think it has been known to happen versus the number of times it hasn't?
So why do you think Conte was lying about Marion Jones, when he was clearly telling the truth about supplying other athletes such as Dwain Chambers and Kelli White who have admitted doping?
Or are you suggesting that they might also be innocent persons that admitted to a crime?
Occam's razor applies here - they took drugs and some like Chambers admitted it quite soon, others took longer and Marion still seems to have difficulties dealing with the truth.
The Real UncleB wrote:
The less intelligent you are the more sure you are of your opinions.
A sentence that proves itself.
And the more likely you are to be racist and/or a right winger.
And the less capable you are of accomplishing anything through your own abilities and perseverance, the more likely you are to conclude every discussion by tacking on an unrelated ad hominem attack against those who can. And the more likely you are to make everything be about race so you can justify sticking your hand out for assistance instead of being a man and earning anything.
The Real UncleB wrote:
I certainly do not consider Conte's claims 100% reliable, as you seem to.
As far as people lying or going along with the prosecution, it has been known to happen -- among all sorts of people and both genders. You seem to be unaware of this
How about C.J Hunter and Tim Montgomery? They both lived with her and both said she was doing PEDs and both stated that she KNEW what she was doing too?
Or are they unreliable too? And the fact that every other athlete Conte fingered publically (Romanoski, White, Chambers, etc..) All admitted it too?
The Real UncleB wrote:
How can people "know' Marion Jones was a drug cheat when she never tested positive for drugs?
We do know that of those who have been caught, many have tested negative on prior occasions; hence, there are many out there using who have not yet tested positive.
We also can't be 100% sure that those who tested positive, have actually used PED's (due to the small chance of false positives, tampering, etc.)
It's a matter of reasonable people studying the complete body of evidence and drawing a likely conclusion. Like how we send guilty people to the chair on strong circumstantial evidence, and innocent people too, based on weak circumstatntial evidence.
AAAARRRGHH! I just got trolled!
Good one Troll
8/10
.Coach Owl Birdo wrote:
The Real UncleB wrote:How can people "know' Marion Jones was a drug cheat when she never tested positive for drugs?
We do know that of those who have been caught, many have tested negative on prior occasions; hence, there are many out there using who have not yet tested positive.
We also can't be 100% sure that those who tested positive, have actually used PED's (due to the small chance of false positives, tampering, etc.)
It's a matter of reasonable people studying the complete body of evidence and drawing a likely conclusion. Like how we send guilty people to the chair on strong circumstantial evidence, and innocent people too, based on weak circumstatntial evidence.
Exactly. If I had to bet on her innocence or guilt, I would have to go with guilty. My point, which is apparently too subtle for the people responding here -- although it certainly does not appear to be in any way inaccessible -- is that her guilt is not 100% certain, that people should not claim to "know' that she is guilty given the fact there is no physical evidence to support this. This is not the same as saying I am sure she is innocent -- a nuance that seems to escapde the lowbrow right wong posters found on Letsrun
Jefe in the CO wrote:
Sooooooo 90%, 80%...10%?
And, just a guess, how many times do you think it has been known to happen versus the number of times it hasn't?
.
False confessions and false statements are made to the police and prosecutors several times every day.
how can you even say that, uncle BS? isn't she a zionist extremist who herself has percsonally imprisoned 10,000 crazy palestinians in her own backyard?????
here we go again wrote:
how can you even say that, uncle BS? isn't she a zionist extremist who herself has percsonally imprisoned 10,000 crazy palestinians in her own backyard?????
.
You are confused. Israel has detained over 12,000 Palestinians without charges, yes. You'll have to explain to me what that has to do with Marion Jones.
Oh, I get it. You don't want to believe that about Israel and I do (as it is 100% true)-- therefore I a must be wrong about any opinion I give on any subject. What an airtight argument
Drug taker or liar take your pick Uncle you dickhead.
Just an observer. wrote:
Drug taker or liar take your pick Uncle you dickhead.
.
Is that your subtle and well written admission that it is incorrect to claim that one "knows" Marion was a drug cheat?
Haha what bullshit from Uncle B.
(1) First he says we shouldn't say we know Marion Jones took PEDs because she didn't test positive. (Implying that we could say we "knew" it if there was a positive test.)
(2) Then a few posters discuss the overwhelming evidence for her taking PEDs and Coach Owl Birdo raises the subtle philosophical point that perhaps we shouldn't use the word "know" unless we are 100% certain of something. Therefore we couldn't use "know" even if Marion Jones had tested positive because of the tiny possibility of false positives. A fair point from Coach Own Birdo, but entirely academic. Effectively the word "know" is used in every day parlance different from that. For example, "I know LA is in California." Here I can use the word "know" even if there I am not 100% certain. How can I be 100% certain? I've never been there.)
(3) Uncle B then pretends that he was actually making the same point that Coach Owl Birdo was making. This is clearly not the case because of (1). Uncle B also somehow implies that it is right wingers who are guilty of using "know" incorrectly, which is not the point Coach Own Birdo was making anyway.
(4) Then Uncle B says it is 100% true that Israel has detained over 12000 Palestinians without charges. How can he know this with this degreee of certainty? Of course he can't, showing that he doesn't even understand the point Coach Owl Birdo made.
What lack of clarity and poorly constructed arguments!
Well said brit. hilarious thread
If it's clarity you want, the one thing we do know to be 100% true is Uncle B is an anti-Semitic troll.
Some Coked Up Brit wrote:
Haha what bullshit from Uncle B.
(1) First he says we shouldn't say we know Marion Jones took PEDs because she didn't test positive. (Implying that we could say we "knew" it if there was a positive test.)
Of course you don't know it. Be clear. Say you strongly suspect it or that the evidence supports this charge.
(2) Then a few posters discuss the overwhelming evidence for her taking PEDs and Coach Owl Birdo raises the subtle philosophical point that perhaps we shouldn't use the word "know" unless we are 100% certain of something. Therefore we couldn't use "know" even if Marion Jones had tested positive because of the tiny possibility of false positives. A fair point from Coach Own Birdo, but entirely academic. Effectively the word "know" is used in every day parlance different from that. For example, "I know LA is in California." Here I can use the word "know" even if there I am not 100% certain. How can I be 100% certain? I've never been there.)
What BS. Know means know. You do know LA is in Cali. You don't know Marion used drugs. R U telling me you cannot discern a difference? Dumb, dishonest, or both -- let the readers be the judge.
(3) Uncle B then pretends that he was actually making the same point that Coach Owl Birdo was making. This is clearly not the case because of (1). Uncle B also somehow implies that it is right wingers who are guilty of using "know" incorrectly, which is not the point Coach Own Birdo was making anyway.
RWers are using the term know properly -- it's just that they think they know things they cannot possibly know. This is a right wing mindset and ties into the phenomena -- whose name escapes me -- where the less intelligent you are the more certain you are of your opinions -- a perfect description of the Right Wing
(4) Then Uncle B says it is 100% true that Israel has detained over 12000 Palestinians without charges. How can he know this with this degreee of certainty? Of course he can't, showing that he doesn't even understand the point Coach Owl Birdo made.
First off, some other numbskull dragged in the israeli mistreatment of Palestinians into this subject, one having little to do with the other (other than to illustrate the consistency of right wing "thinking"). It is certain that Israel has detained over 12,000 Palestinians without charges. This is beyond doubt. Therefore I do know this. There is a little thing called google which you can use to see for yourself -- but then again, you would find something that contradicts your viewpoint and we mustn't have that. You can begin with Wikkipedia -- which references many sources.
What lack of clarity and poorly constructed arguments!
I agree with this sentiment as applied to your arguments. I would only hope to be a a little more literate in my communication
Since Uncle B just got bitch slapped out of his own thread, I'd like to change the topic and and pose a question. Is Uncle B really a little, old, white man living in Provo, Utah?