Anti-Muslim Terrorist Attack in... NZ?

BobTheCoward said:
It is generally expected that a position you take should be supported by evidence.
Click to expand...
Life is simply not worth living unless everything is supported by evidence. For example: I refuse to cut my toenails unless I have evidence that they need to be cut. It is as simple as that.
 
Elagabalus said:
To prevent possible accessory raving nutjobs from flying out of Chch with their murder weapon stuffed in their hand luggage. Duh!
Click to expand...

I understand the goal. What is the evidence that was going to happen? Is the decision supported by the evidence?
 
BobTheCoward said:
Actually no. Phantomwolf's post has no evidence to justify a course of action.
Click to expand...

The fact is that you don't need evidence to justify taking a course of action, you do it because you think that there could be a threat and you take the precautions just in case.

I have no evidence that leaving my doors and windows unlocked when I go downtown will result in my home being burgled, in fact the evidence I have is that it won't, but that doesn't stop me trying to remember to make sure everything is closed and locked before leaving.

They had no evidence that there was any danger of attacks outside of Christchurch, but armed police when to Mosques around the country and made sure that no more attacks happened.

You want to have evidence for a course of action, but in these situations, having evidence means you're too late to act. Shutting down domestic flights after one has been attacked or hijacked is not a sensible action, and besides, you have no say in how we do things here. NZers are happy with the actions taken, and that is all the matters.
 
Last edited:
BobTheCoward said:
Phantom also misstated my opinion.
Click to expand...
A lot of people would take that concept as they are not broadcasting their opinion very well.

What is your exact opinion on detail, with justifications as to why the decision was wrong

That might help
 
New Zealand Herald: Police believe one man is responsible for yesterday’s Christchurch massacre - and allege he traveled between two packed mosques and killed at least 49 people. And within 36 minutes - it was all over. He was caught, dragged from a car by two police officers, and taken into custody.
 
BobTheCoward said:
People are happy with tarot card readers. Skeptics still point out it's not based on science.
Click to expand...

How I like my mashed potatoes isn't based on science either. Get over it. We don't based everything in our lives on science. Sometimes we just do things because they are sensible, even if there is no evidence that they need to happen. It's called taking precautions.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Then all you have don't is waste a page arguing about something not worth arguing about, and made a mockery of the 49 people who were slaughtered.
Click to expand...

I'm asking why people believe what they believe. That seems like an appropriate question on a skeptics forum
 
BobTheCoward said:
I'm asking why people believe what they believe. That seems like an appropriate question on a skeptics forum
Click to expand...
And people have said precaution given the airport is 15 minutes away and the amount of culprits was unknown, and hand luggage couldn't be checked.

Which bit precisely do you think is wrong and why

Embrass my skepticism of your opinion and answer
 
cullennz said:
And people have said precaution given the airport is 15 minutes away and the amount of culprits was unknown, and hand luggage couldn't be checked.

Which bit precisely do you think is wrong and why

Embrass my skepticism of your opinion and answer
Click to expand...

I don't have an opinion if it is right or wrong.
 
cullennz said:
Well that was worth the effort then

Just trolling
Click to expand...

Asking what evidence a person has for their position is not trolling. I don't have a position because I don't have the evidence. This is basic questioning of why someone has a position.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Asking what evidence a person has for their position is not trolling. I don't have a position because I don't have the evidence. This is basic questioning of why someone has a position.
Click to expand...
Which has been laid out for you and you have made no attempt to discount or rule out as reasons for doing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom