Would you say a sign saying 'girls toys' is inappropriate?

[Halibut]

16 minutes ago, BrexitGuy said:

Thank you. I'm glad you've seen sense. See, there's no need for Google is there? Just ask the people who've been around a little. Life skills are worth ten times that of a silly focus group x

Do you believe global warming is real?

[BrexitGuy]

30 minutes ago, Halibut said:

Do you believe global warming is real?

A very interesting question. We are all aware of the scientific research with this subject, and to be fair science does have an actual physical thing to touch, monitor and attempt repair by people who are more than capable of doing the job, so yes Halibut, I do believe in global warming. 

Now when you get people who claim to be able to read the mindset of other people, that's where my belief in science becomes questionable. Our amazing brain reading scientists claim we only use 10% of our noggins. How they know this is questionable. There is absolutely no concrete evidence anywhere in the world that can prove a person and their thought process can be changed by outside forces. Granted, there may be studies and so-forth but nothing to say "That person is X because of Y" , unlike global warming which is physically proved.

So what's your point?

Edited December 31, 2018 by BrexitGuy

[SnailyBoy]

1 hour ago, BrexitGuy said:

A very interesting question. We are all aware of the scientific research with this subject, and to be fair science does have an actual physical thing to touch, monitor and attempt repair by people who are more than capable of doing the job, so yes Halibut, I do believe in global warming. 

Now when you get people who claim to be able to read the mindset of other people, that's where my belief in science becomes questionable. Our amazing brain reading scientists claim we only use 10% of our noggins. How they know this is questionable. There is absolutely no concrete evidence anywhere in the world that can prove a person and their thought process can be changed by outside forces. Granted, there may be studies and so-forth but nothing to say "That person is X because of Y" , unlike global warming which is physically proved.

So what's your point?

It's a pity you're so disparaging of Google (other search engines are available), because if you embraced it for the tool that it is and done a little research you'll find that the 10% brain thing is a myth.

 

I've left out any references so you can have a little practice.

 

Enjoy

[BrexitGuy]

45 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

It's a pity you're so disparaging of Google (other search engines are available), because if you embraced it for the tool that it is and done a little research you'll find that the 10% brain thing is a myth.

 

I've left out any references so you can have a little practice.

 

Enjoy

Oh for the love of God!!!!! Of course it's a myth FGS!!!! How can they prove it? They can't, which is my point. (That's why I said "claim") The search engines are a minefield of results, not always correct either. It's all claims claims and more claims. Concrete evidence is something that is unchallengeable. I will leave out any references to this so you can have a little fiddle too xx

[SnailyBoy]

31 minutes ago, BrexitGuy said:

Oh for the love of God!!!!! Of course it's a myth FGS!!!! How can they prove it? They can't, which is my point. (That's why I said "claim") The search engines are a minefield of results, not always correct either. It's all claims claims and more claims. Concrete evidence is something that is unchallengeable. I will leave out any references to this so you can have a little fiddle too xx

That's your point, seriously, is that how you think the scientific process works?

 

Yes, there are claims out there, that's why you check the evidence, is it peer reviewed etc.

 

Yet you call upon the evidence of 'personal anecdote' when challenging the findings of others.

[BrexitGuy]

5 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

That's your point, seriously, is that how you think the scientific process works?

 

Yes, there are claims out there, that's why you check the evidence, is it peer reviewed etc.

 

Yet you call upon the evidence of 'personal anecdote' when challenging the findings of others.

Yes I do. And the reason for this is because others findings are unproven. 

Can't you get that? If there was one single shread of firm concrete proven evidence that shows undoubtedly that gender stereotyping causes lasting and harmful damage to an individual, then I would lay down and say OK.

But there isn't. Just studies and alleged thoughts that it does. 

So calling upon personal experience IS relevant.

Unless you can prove otherwise. X

[SnailyBoy]

2 minutes ago, BrexitGuy said:

Yes I do. And the reason for this is because others findings are unproven. 

Can't you get that? If there was one single shread of firm concrete proven evidence that shows undoubtedly that gender stereotyping causes lasting and harmful damage to an individual, then I would lay down and say OK.

But there isn't. Just studies and alleged thoughts that it does. 

So calling upon personal experience IS relevant.

Unless you can prove otherwise. X

I get that you don't accept the evidence presented to you, some would call that wilful ignorance.

 

As for your claim, you need to demonstrate it, prove that your personal experience is relevant in how gender stereotyping affects children. The burden of proof is on you.

 

Show your methodology etc, test criteria, control groups, etc.

 

 

[BrexitGuy]

1 hour ago, SnailyBoy said:

I get that you don't accept the evidence presented to you, some would call that wilful ignorance.

 

As for your claim, you need to demonstrate it, prove that your personal experience is relevant in how gender stereotyping affects children. The burden of proof is on you.

 

Show your methodology etc, test criteria, control groups, etc.

 

 

Are you now saying I'm ignorant? 

I've given you proof that's called personal experience. I agree this could have as much clout as the studies. But it's just as worthy as any stranger saying different. 

My methodology and test criteria and control group has appeared over sixty years, with two normal functioning children and several normally functioning grandchildren. No damage, no harm.

Now you prove otherwise seeing as you believe me to be ignorant and incapable of producing normal and healthy unharmed offspring, even after taking them to shops that have boys and girls sections.

It's a bit like me telling you your meat and potato pie looks undercooked, even though you've been baking them for years. 

You can't prove it, however hard you try or no matter how many times you call me ignorant. 

You really can't.

[mad-dad]

Same here BrexitGuy.

 

 

Edited December 31, 2018 by mad-dad

[SnailyBoy]

11 minutes ago, BrexitGuy said:

Are you now saying I'm ignorant? 

I've given you proof that's called personal experience. I agree this could have as much clout as the studies. But it's just as worthy as any stranger saying different. 

My methodology and test criteria and control group has appeared over sixty years, with two normal functioning children and several normally functioning grandchildren. No damage, no harm.

Now you prove otherwise seeing as you believe me to be ignorant and incapable of producing normal and healthy unharmed offspring, even after taking them to shops that have boys and girls sections.

It's a bit like me telling you your meat and potato pie looks undercooked, even though you've been baking them for years. 

You can't prove it, however hard you try or no matter how many times you call me ignorant. 

You really can't.

No, I'm suggesting you're willfully ignorant. As for your methodology and data set, that's laughable.