Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: Oh for ____'s sake. You're betting on people not reading the paper. This is just classic EAllusion, working against reality, redefining it, and then asserting it's the truth.
Conclusions
This study shows that military training doesn’t create a more proficient serial murderer or a more malicious one. The military and non-military population had no statistically significant difference in kill count, active killing career or total killing career. The military sample population wasn’t more or less likely to torture their victims than those without a military background. However, it would be wrong to say military training doesn’t influence a serial murderer at all. The military sample did have more cases where a firearm was used to kill than the non-military population, which may be due to familiarity from training. Overall the subject needs to be studied more in depth
- Doc
Are you not able to read what this means? The conclusion you are quoting concerns whether military serial murderers are better at killing than their non-military counterparts. The paper was interested in whether military training makes for more efficient murderers. It finds that there's no difference how much they kill. This is not addressing the question of whether military affiliated people are more likely to be mass murderers. It looks at about 2000 cases and finds a higher % of them than there are military affiliated people in the general population are mass murderers.
This is you literally unable to process your own source and calling people liars because they don't misread it like you do.
The military and non-military population had no statistically significant difference in kill count, active killing career or total killing career.
Weird how EA can literally look reality in the face and be like, "The paper one hundred percent proved that the military population kills at 30 times the rate of the non-military population."
It's just “F” ing bizarre.
eta: What we're going to see is more goalpost shifting, claims that we're incapable of reading, and then EA will set about claiming something objectively retarded is, in fact, brilliant and the truth.
- Doc
Last edited by Guest on Thu Nov 22, 2018 4:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
EAllusion wrote:Well, reading the first few paragraphs of your paper suggests it’s about the relative success of mass killers when in the military and whether they become better at killing rather than the representation of ex-military in the population of mass killers. What are you claiming this paper says before I go to the trouble of reading it?
honorentheos wrote:From the paper's first page -
A study of 354 American serial murders yielded only 25 (7%) with military background (Castle, 2001).
According to fivethreeeight -
As of 2014, the VA estimates there were 22 million military veterans in the U.S. population. If you add their figures on veterans to the active personnel numbers mentioned above, 7.3 percent of all living Americans have served in the military at some point in their lives.
So, about the same distribution between serial killers with military backgrounds as Americans who served.
It looks like you fell victim to confirmation bias.
Kevin Graham wrote:I don't know that this is at all helpful. After all, how many CEO's are serial killers? Probably can't name a single one.
Psychopath ≠ serial killer
honorentheos wrote:EA made a specific claim up thread. Something something serial killers something.
Seems easy to follow.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
honorentheos wrote:EA made a specific claim up thread. Something something serial killers something.
No. He referred to mass killers.
Well. The first goalpost he aimed for was this:
The US military attracts psychopaths who get off on authority and hurting people... This is objectively true.
He then subsequently doubled down on his statement above followed by:
It's such a harmless truism that it shouldn't be a problem to acknowledge,
His position has since bounced around with no sourcing, tripling down, and then reframing reality which I find utterly bizarre because he thinks everyone is so daft they don't notice when he does it.
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Kevin Graham wrote:Nah, baby killing hasn't been brought up and it has already been stated that this is about whether or not the military attracts psychopaths, meaning they'd willingly join for the purpose of having more freedom to act on their psychopathic tendencies or whatever. This wouldn't apply to military personnel who were drafted because they didn't choose crap.
Kevin, in all seriousness, please stop guessing and asserting. It's so Fox News.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
EAllusion wrote:Well, reading the first few paragraphs of your paper suggests it’s about the relative success of mass killers when in the military and whether they become better at killing rather than the representation of ex-military in the population of mass killers. What are you claiming this paper says before I go to the trouble of reading it?
honorentheos wrote:From the paper's first page -
A study of 354 American serial murders yielded only 25 (7%) with military background (Castle, 2001).
According to fivethreeeight -
As of 2014, the VA estimates there were 22 million military veterans in the U.S. population. If you add their figures on veterans to the active personnel numbers mentioned above, 7.3 percent of all living Americans have served in the military at some point in their lives.
So, about the same distribution between serial killers with military backgrounds as Americans who served.
It looks like you fell victim to confirmation bias.
Kevin Graham wrote:I don't know that this is at all helpful. After all, how many CEO's are serial killers? Probably can't name a single one.
Psychopath ≠ serial killer
honorentheos wrote:EAllusion made a specific claim up thread. Something something serial killers something.
Seems easy to follow.
I talked about mass murderers, not serial killers. Spree killers are mass murderers, but not serial killers. Helpfully, the paper goes into detail about mass murders of which serial killers are one subset. This paper finds in the group it analyzes about 10% of the population of mass murderers are military affiliated against 7% of the population. It's not too far off the 1.5x number I ballparked from memory.
Psychopath is not the same thing as serial killer. Business executives, people's bosses, notoriously have a high incidence of psychopathy. Only a tiny % of psychopaths become serial killers. Psychopathy refers to a series of theoretically correlated personality traits that includes, but is not exclusive to the desire to wield authority and hurt others. This does not mean psychopaths kill people illegally as a matter of course. You don't need to do that to hurt people and psychopaths are capable of staying within the bounds of social rules when they perceive it in their interest to do so.
Conclusions