Israel Says It Has Proof That Syria Has Used Chemical Weapons

[CountDeMoney]

Well, he's got a point: we don't know if it's been pro-Assad forces or rebels.  We can suspect, but we can't confirm just yet. 

And chain of custody in this context is all about empirical determination of fact, you Benghazitards.

[CountDeMoney]

President may be too weaselly about this.  We shall see.  If if he still futzing about with evidentiary standards a month from now, then US credibility will take a hit.

70,000 are already dead.  I don't think credibility is an issue anymore.

[Razgovory]

President may be too weaselly about this.  We shall see.  If if he still futzing about with evidentiary standards a month from now, then US credibility will take a hit.

70,000 are already dead.  I don't think credibility is an issue anymore.

Yeah, but who cares?  These assholes deserve each other.  If intervened we'd be trying to kill them.  Much cheaper for them to kill each other.

[derspiess]

Hey, check this out.  From the president's press conference:

President may be too weaselly about this.  We shall see.  If if he still futzing about with evidentiary standards a month from now, then US credibility will take a hit.

You gotta admit, I scored a rare point there.  GIVE ME MY DUE

[derspiess]

Well, he's got a point: we don't know if it's been pro-Assad forces or rebels.  We can suspect, but we can't confirm just yet. 

And chain of custody in this context is all about empirical determination of fact, you Benghazitards.

I think you're missing my point.  I mentioned the absence of a chain of custody the other day and Joan took exception to it. 

[The Minsky Moment]

You gotta admit, I scored a rare point there.  GIVE ME MY DUE

You keep assuming I am 100% for Obama, when in fact it is closer to 93.4%   

[derspiess]

You gotta admit, I scored a rare point there.  GIVE ME MY DUE

You keep assuming I am 100% for Obama, when in fact it is closer to 93.4%   

Not even that-- just that I called "chain of custody" ahead of time.

But yeah, it is also one of those rare neat little events where I'm pretty much on the president's side and you're not.

[The Minsky Moment]

Not even that-- just that I called "chain of custody" ahead of time.

It was in the story that Jimmy posted just before.
But I'll take your word you didn't see it there and give you credit for indepedent discovery.  You can be the Alfred Russel Wallace of Syrian skepticism.

[derspiess]

It was in the story that Jimmy posted just before.

Damn.  I don't read Tim's articles for the most part.  We dealt with chain of custody a lot when I worked for a DNA lab, so that's why it came to mind.

[Viking]

Not even that-- just that I called "chain of custody" ahead of time.

It was in the story that Jimmy posted just before.
But I'll take your word you didn't see it there and give you credit for indepedent discovery.  You can be the Alfred Russel Wallace of Syrian skepticism.

Be careful with that Wallace reference. Wallace is in an old tradition of scientists having a couple of good ideas and then spending the rest of their careers on nonsense like Pauling with his silly idea that Vitamin C cured cancer, Newton focused on alchemy, Einstein on Crust slippage Wallace spent most of his career after gaining fame and non-fortune studying spiritualism alongside the likes of Arthur Conan Doyle.

Then again, this might be the best analogy to Timmay yet.

[Malthus]

You gotta admit, I scored a rare point there.  GIVE ME MY DUE

You keep assuming I am 100% for Obama, when in fact it is closer to 93.4%   

Not even that-- just that I called "chain of custody" ahead of time.

But yeah, it is also one of those rare neat little events where I'm pretty much on the president's side and you're not.

Again, my prediction is that the US would find a way of not getting involved in any significant way even if it could be proved beyond any reasonable doubt.

[Sheilbh]

Well, he's got a point: we don't know if it's been pro-Assad forces or rebels.  We can suspect, but we can't confirm just yet. 

Or whether it's Assad, or a local commander. The latter's actually more worrying but doesn't necessarily lead to a big intervention.

[The Minsky Moment]

Well, he's got a point: we don't know if it's been pro-Assad forces or rebels.  We can suspect, but we can't confirm just yet. 

What's the Bayesian prior on Assad vs. rebels?
One has a known existing stockpile of such weapons, and known means and instrumentalities of employing them.  The others do not. 

[CountDeMoney]

Apparently, the Jews just bombed stuff in Syria related to possible chemical weapons launch facilities.

[Admiral Yi]

Hmmm.