Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, tle said:

The empirical evidence is we're not seeing it happen. The empirical evidence is the regret over the drunken incident in the parking lot... If you ignore those then I guess they're still fucking....

I cannot believe you just posted that???? Please talk to someone who can't point out to you what's wrong with that statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ddhm said:

If this current self confident Martina fucks this wreck of a woman like Nelly , I honestly will be out of words 🥺🥺😢

I don't see it happening... My opinion of course....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tle said:

I don't see it happening... My opinion of course....

Martina can be very fragile at times .. many would like but for the sake of Bogdan , please not ..this guy , how much more he can accept ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, philo said:

I cannot believe you just posted that???? Please talk to someone who can't point out to you what's wrong with that statement.

Of course you're right... They're still fucking... Could you please share your empirical evidence with me so I can come over to that conclusion too?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tle said:

Of course you're right... They're still fucking... Could you please share your empirical evidence with me so I can come over to that conclusion too?

You still don't get it do you? I have not made any empirical statements that I need to provide evidence for. And, I know enough not to attempt to make the claim that the lack of evidence is evidence. Sorry to disappoint you. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, philo said:

You still don't get it do you? I have not made any empirical statements that I need to provide evidence for. And, I know enough not to attempt to make the claim that the lack of evidence is evidence. Sorry to disappoint you. LOL

No worries.. I'm not easy to disappoint... I was just hoping that you could share what you've seen or heard that helped your skills of analysis and induction arrive at your understanding of the situation....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tle said:

No worries.. I'm not easy to disappoint... I was just hoping that you could share what you've seen or heard that helped your skills of analysis and induction arrive at your understanding of the situation....

I have watched for many hours...I have viewed and reviewed scenes that I thought had some meaning beyond the obvious...I have, in fact, used inductive, (rather than a deductive) approaches to my analysis...I have used fact pattern recognition strategies...I have also used the training I have received in observation (not unlike the training one might be receive as a law enforcement investigator). The best skill of all, i learned from my grandmother: not to a make declarative statement that I could not back up with evidence. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, ddhm said:

Gina is one of the most genuine of them all ..the person on cameras is exactly the person away of them .. and we should never forget that she has always been standing for anyone of her roomates , it isn’t a coincidence that it is also that “ everyone loves Gina “ for her colleagues , she’s more sensitive and emotional than many who try to bring this image on cameras but she , like Masha , being real and not giving a fuck for the cameras , it is simply hurting  her public image …RLC is a choice , you either become a “ Leora “ or you remain a “ Masha ..these are the two variants .. 

I love Gina because she is so pure. As you see her, she is. She doesn't care about the cameras and can be herself. I've been following her since the beginning and I still haven't got tired of her so I'm glad she's back. Even if it is just for a little while because I don't think she will do a tour again. I hope she does. Always thought she has a webcam past. What I also like about her is that sometimes she looks very naughty in the camera. Like, I know you are watching and have the hots for me. Gina is simply the best of RLC

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, philo said:

I have watched for many hours...I have viewed and reviewed scenes that I thought had some meaning beyond the obvious...I have, in fact, used inductive, (rather than a deductive) approaches to my analysis...I have used fact pattern recognition strategies...I have also used the training I have received in observation (not unlike the training one might be receive as a law enforcement investigator). The best skill of all, i learned from my grandmother: not to a make declarative statement that I could not back up with evidence. 

One thing you might like to add to your skill set is the knowledge that other people can apply the same or similar techniques and arrive at different conclusions....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, philo said:

I have watched for many hours...I have viewed and reviewed scenes that I thought had some meaning beyond the obvious...I have, in fact, used inductive, (rather than a deductive) approaches to my analysis...I have used fact pattern recognition strategies...I have also used the training I have received in observation (not unlike the training one might be receive as a law enforcement investigator). The best skill of all, i learned from my grandmother: not to a make declarative statement that I could not back up with evidence. 

BTW. Those are admirable skills...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, tle said:

No worries.. I'm not easy to disappoint... I was just hoping that you could share what you've seen or heard that helped your skills of analysis and induction arrive at your understanding of the situation....

What many people on this forum are demanding is "Proof". Good luck with that! Proof is the outcome of the deductive reasoning approach. The scientific community gave up on that a few hundred years ago because it is not attainable. The standard now is "high probability" which is an outcome of inductive reasoning, which is attainable. Usually acceptable is a probability of greater than chance. I personally strive for something above 75%. For me, (and for most people in the world)  that is sufficient. In my work, we often achieve above 90%. This is possible now with the advent of algorithms. They offer degrees now in predictive analytics.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, philo said:

What many people on this forum are demanding is "Proof". Good luck with that! Proof is the outcome of the deductive reasoning approach. The scientific community gave up on that a few hundred years ago because it is not attainable. The standard now is "high probability" which is an outcome of inductive reasoning, which is attainable. Usually acceptable is a probability of greater than chance. I personally strive for something above 75%. For me, (and for most people in the world)  that is sufficient. In my work, we often achieve above 90%. This is possible now with the advent of algorithms. They offer degrees now in predictive analytics.   

Inductive reasoning requires specific data to reach a probability… But you seem to have no specific data to share with us….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...