Divemedic

Burden of Proof

One of the things that really annoys me about Internet debates is that a person will make an outlandish claim without a shred of evidence to support it, then someone will call them on it. The person who made the claim will then respond with shrieks of, “Do some research! Look it up!”

About 1400 years ago, the Roman jurist Paulus had this to say:

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat.

Roughly translated, this means, “Proof rests on the person who asserts, not the person who denies.” This is an ancient statement of the principle, and is the very basis of modern legal theory. It’s what prevents someone from accusing another of a crime without evidence. For example: “Donald Trump raped me,” should logically require some sort of evidence, and has instead turned into, “Donald Trump denying that he raped me defames my character. Why, he can’t prove that he didn’t rape me, therefore he is guilty.”

The same is true in most debates. It’s one of the reasons why I ask those who make claims here in comments provide evidence to back up those claims. The practical reasoning is straightforward: making an assertion does not, by itself, give other people a reason to believe it. If merely asserting something obliged everyone else to investigate or disprove it, anyone could impose unlimited work on others by inventing claims.

A corollary to this concept is Hitchens’s razor, associated with Christopher Hitchens:

“What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.”

There’s a meaningful difference between someone identifying a particular study or document for you to examine and vaguely saying “do your own research.” The former supplies something assessable; the latter leaves the listener responsible for discovering, or even constructing, the opposing argument.

Two qualifications keep the principle precise:

  • Withholding belief is different from proving a claim false. “You haven’t supported that” is a sufficient reason not to accept it, but it also doesn’t establish the claim to be false.
  • The burden concerns substantive claims, including negative ones. Someone asserting “Donald Trump never raped that woman,” for example, also owes evidence. Merely expressing doubt does not carry the same obligation, meaning it is more accurate to say, “There is no substantive evidence that Donald Trump raped that woman.”

Carl Sagan said it well,

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

That adds a point about the strength of evidence needed: a claim that overturns well-supported knowledge needs evidence strong enough to justify that revision.

I work with this every day in medicine. When a person comes in with chest pains, we perform a series of tests to determine what the problem is. Is this a heart attack? We then look for evidence of a heart attack:

  • Is their ECG normal?
  • Do they have any proteins in their blood that would support a diagnosis of heart attack?
  • Are there enzymes in their blood that would indicate blood clots?
  • Does a perfusion study indicate blood clots in the lungs?
  • So on, and so forth, attempting to find evidence to support a potential diagnosis.

Frequently, no evidence of any condition can be found. So now we don’t have any evidence of any health problem. That doesn’t mean the person isn’t having a heart attack or other serious condition. It means there isn’t any evidence supporting that conclusion. Sometimes it goes like that. In every debate, sometimes we just don’t know what we can’t support with evidence.

This blog has rules intended to promote reasonable debate. It also gets around 200 comments a day, the vast majority of them being spam. The spam filter catches many, but sometimes the filter tosses legitimate comments in the trash bucket. I still review every single comment in order to restore legitimate ones. I also read every single comment before I approve them. When I approve a comment, I am not saying I agree with the comment. All I am looking for is adherence to the basic rules of the blog. Save those comments I delete for personal attacks, advertising (SPAM), and repetitive posts (sometimes a person will post the same comment multiple times on the same post), I don’t filter for content.

Why don’t I filter for content? I want debate. I like seeing people hash something out. That doesn’t include making claims before demanding others prove them for you. That is how children debate things.

However, someone making a claim that hasn’t been well established by evidence should provide reasons for it. I will withhold agreement until they do. If you make a claim, then make the demand that another “do some research” when they question that claim, expect that claim to be rejected.

By Divemedic, ago

Causus Belli

Not only does AOC want to impeach SCOTUS members for the crime of “legalizing a lot” of things, she says the “idea that nine people can overturn laws that hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocates and policymakers drew consensus on” doesn’t benefit us, and by us I assume she means those power hungry members of the DSA who can’t have some pesky concepts like a Constitution, separation of powers, or personal liberty get in the way of their naked lust for absolute power.

If the DSA gets their wish, they would impeach the President, vicePresident, the entire cabinet, and the Supreme Court. When they are done, I assume they intend to continue stomping through Tokyo as they swat planes from the sky until they reach your home’s door.

At what point will the American people decide that they have had enough?

By Divemedic, ago

Breaking News

The Attorney General of Florida released an opinion today that Florida’s ban on trigger enhancements is unconstitutional, and his office will not defend a conviction under the statute going forward. Here is the text of the law:

790.222 Bump-fire stocks prohibited.—A person may not import into this state or transfer, distribute, sell, keep for sale, offer for sale, possess, or give to another person a bump-fire stock. A person who violates this section commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, the term “bump-fire stock” means a conversion kit, a tool, an accessory, or a device used to alter the rate of fire of a firearm to mimic automatic weapon fire or which is used to increase the rate of fire to a faster rate than is possible for a person to fire such semiautomatic firearm unassisted by a kit, a tool, an accessory, or a device.

I have some binary triggers and a couple of trigger kickers. This is going to be awesome. My first project will be to make an AR in 300BLK with an 8 inch barrel, a binary trigger, a suppressor, and a Holographic sight. Loaded with subsonic projectiles near 200 grains, it will be my new house gun. One pull and release of the trigger will get a miscreant 400 grains of GTFO moving at around 1000 fps.

Here is the AG’s letter, it makes for an interesting read:

By Divemedic, ago

Fractional Dry Cleaning

One of the things I try to do here at Sector Ocho is educate my readers. We need to understand the game if we want to win the game. Also, it’s pretty boring to read nothing except another tale of the latest chimp out, crooked politician, or proposed gun control law. Let’s talk about something that’s misunderstood by many: fractional banking.

Many people think fractional banking means the bank can simply lend out at much money as it feels like, while just creating money out of thin air. That’s not the case. Any bank that tries this will soon find itself out of money. See the story of the Silicon Valley Bank. That bank allowed its reserves to drop too low, and when the FED raised rates, this caused the bank to run short of funds and triggered the bank to sell some assets at a discount in order to raise their liquidity so they could meet payment demands. When news of this got out, it caused a run on the bank. That is: depositors were afraid the bank was running out of money and rushed to withdraw their funds. Too many did this, and the bank collapsed.

A bank is in the business of buying and selling, just like any other. That business buys at a lower price, then resells that product (money) at a higher price. The price difference is caused by relative risk and cost. Let’s look at any other business to see how that works.

You pay depositors for their money at a low rate before lending it out to at somewhat higher risk to borrowers. You hold some of that money back just in case some of your depositors need some of their funds back at some point.

So how do banks seem to create money from thin air? The answer is they don’t. They take in your money, and lend the majority of it out to others. Your money still exists, but only as a ledger entry. Your actual money is no longer in the bank’s possession, it’s been loaned out to someone else. In that sense, the money loaned out and your deposit simultaneously exist, but only one of you can have it at a time.

If it helps, think of your money as being a suit. You don’t need a suit at this moment, so you hand it to the dry cleaner, who gives you a receipt for it. At any time, you can redeem that receipt with the dry cleaner, who will give you a clean suit and a little cash for your trouble. At the same time, people who need a suit can borrow one for a somewhat larger fee. Anyway, your suit is soon loaned out to someone else. When you need a suit, you hand over your claim ticket, and the dry cleaner hands you a clean suit and a couple of dollars for your trouble.

You have your suit stored at the dry cleaner, your claim ticket says so. Other people are wearing suits, so did the dry cleaner create suits from thin air? Of course not. You theoretically have a suit that you aren’t wearing, someone else has temporary possession of a suit that isn’t his, and everyone makes money from the arrangement in the meantime.

This system works well until the Yule Ball comes around and everyone wants their suits at the same time. To minimize the chances of this being a problem, the dry cleaner resolves to always have a percentage of suits physically on hand: usually between 10% to 30% of their suits are physically in the store at any one time. That way, if a depositor has a funeral, wedding, or job interview, they can always get a suit. God help that dry cleaner if people start to believe their suits are no longer safely deposited at the dry cleaner. Everyone will demand their suits back, but many of them are currently loaned out and not available. The dry cleaner just went out of business.

If you want to see how all of this is tracked, the balance sheet is a good place to start. You can read that here.

By Divemedic, ago

Violent Trannies

Via Miguel: This guy who appears to be LARPing some D&D character or another showed up at a TPUSA event and began smacking people with his staff. There is more here than meets the eye.

First, this violent lefty is not just a dude, he is a tranny named Ciro Tomlian. He identifies as female, male, and non-binary. Tomlian is studying mechanical engineering.

  • Tranny Flag- check
  • Sword- check

Second, if you examine the cane he is carrying, that isn’t just a stick. It’s a cane called the IRISH BLACKTHORN WALKING STICK. It’s nearly two pounds of hardened plastic that is sold and marketed as a weapon. Under Texas Penal Code § 46.01, a “club” is defined as any instrument “specially designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of inflicting serious bodily injury or death by striking a person”. Because Cold Steel is a tactical weapons manufacturer and markets this 37-inch, ~29 oz stick around the traditional Irish fighting shillelagh, it could be argued that it is specifically designed as a striking weapon rather than a medical aid. That makes it illegal to carry on college campus.

Third, not only did he deliberately carry this weapon onto a college campus, he used it as a weapon to attack people who he knew to be unarmed. (Which is a forcible felony and justifies force in response, including lethal force in any location where I have a right to be, which is the case in Florida and- at least for the time being- in Texas, as well.)

It’s easy to make fun of the left for being retarded faggots, but one thing you have to give them is they are not afraid to use violence in order to subjugate and silence those with whom they disagree. I don’t care who you are, if you have a weapon in your hands, I am going to mark you for easy future identification. “Yes officer, the man who attaacked me is lying right over there with the sucking chest wound.”

By Divemedic, ago

Landlords

Commies hate property owners, especially ones who happen to be landlords. In New York, the next step on the path to communism has been taken. Mamdani just signed a law that any apartment building sold must first be offered to approved “non-profits” who will have an exclusive 145-day window to buy the property. If the sale doesn’t go through, but the property is sold within 12 months of the end of that window, the organizations will have the right of first refusal, allowing them to match the competing offer.

The law covers buildings with four or more units that are in significant disrepair, as well as properties with existing affordability restrictions. Note that the term ” disrepair ” doesn’t seem to be defined anywhere.

The city government will maintain a list of qualified entities, including nonprofit housing organizations, tenant groups, community land trusts, and other organizations that won’t be corrupt or funnel any money to government officials.

This is going to destroy the New York real estate market.

By Divemedic, ago

Impeaching SCOTUS

AOC tells CNN the Democrats are looking at impeaching the Supreme Court.

By Divemedic, ago

Sigh…LGS

Went to a LGS this morning, and they are an SOT holder. I went in to look at perhaps getting another can. The nice thing is Florida has no sales tax on firearms for the rest of the year, plus there are (for now) no transfer taxes. I was talking to the guy about things, and he mentioned that they are selling suppressors like hotcakes. He said they had already sold more than ten, and it was barely lunchtime.

I confirmed that all that’s needed is a 4473, and he confirmed. I talked about my theory of the Democrats bringing back the NFA transfer restrictions and making the transfer fees $5000 each. He told me (and this is why I think he’s full of shit) that it won’t happen because $5000 is a “hard sell” and would never get past Congress. Besides, he pointed out, all they need to do in order to bring back registration is to “tear up that memo declaring no more transfer forms are needed.”

I didn’t point out to him that the NFA is unconstitutional without the fee, because the only reason the law passed SCOTUS is that it’s a tax law. No tax, no law.

Then he went on to tell me how I can still file the transfer forms free of charge, they are still there, but are no longer required. Even so, you can fill them out voluntarily so when Congress reinstates the registry, you won’t have to worry about whether or not you are legal. He said, “If you are afraid of being on a list, that won’t help. You’re already on a list. We all are. They want the real criminals. They will never go door to door, because they know what will happen. Look, they aren’t looking for you and a few suppressors. ”

Of course they won’t, and I already know what will happen. Guys like him will turn them in without being told to do so, and will rat out anyone else they can to save their own ass. This guy runs a gun store, but is shilling for the ATF and the boot on his neck. I was going to get a can, but not there, and not from that guy.

Oh, and I am not registering shit.

By Divemedic, ago

Impossible

The story that an illegal tried to hijack a plane by storming the cockpit can’t be true. Illegals are just doing the jobs Americans won’t do, and planes have been declared as hijacking free zones.

The important question is this: Why did we enact REAL ID if we are just going to let people who are here illegally and have been deported three times get on an airplane? Why do I have to present an ID, my plane ticket, and answer questions from some wanna be petty dictator, then have an electronic scan of my genitals after removing my shoes, my belt, and my dignity?

On Monday night, I returned to Orlando from spending a week in Denver. This hijacking happened just after my plane landed in Orlando. I can’t believe I had to suffer through all of that absolute indignity, only to see people like this breeze on through. On the outbound leg from Orlando to Denver a week earlier, I had to stand in the TSA screening line for 45 minutes. What does that accomplish, exactly?

By Divemedic, ago