# Is Shodan more retarded lately, or has he maintained a consistent level of retardation all along?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shodan-more-retarded-lately-or-has-he-maintained-a-consistent-level-of-retardation-all-along/610530>\
**Category:** The BBQ Pit\
**Created:** [January 24, 2012, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shodan-more-retarded-lately-or-has-he-maintained-a-consistent-level-of-retardation-all-along/610530 "2012-01-24T20:31:26Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 878

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2012, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shodan-more-retarded-lately-or-has-he-maintained-a-consistent-level-of-retardation-all-along/610530/878 "2012-02-07T19:02:45Z")

</div>

> [@CannyDan](#):
>
> I’ve stayed out of this so far, but I feel compelled to ask:  
> **Bricker** , are you really trying to compare the depth and breadth of published and peer reviewed evidence regarding ‘global warming’ to a newspaper article offering some statistically questionable (as others have pointed out) data for a mere two years period, compiled by non-statisticians, for purposes not necessarily directly relevant to the issue under discussion?
> 
> Yes, when the overwhelming weight of the evidence goes my way, I’ll accept it. And when evidence that doesn’t go any particular way is clearly incomplete or even suspect, then I will insist on more data. There is nothing either partisan or nefarious in that, and isn’t the slightest bit “reminiscent of the global warming deniers”.

Yes.

Because the proposition I asked for admissions on in that thread was NOT nebulous, and the evidence was not statistically insignificant.

I said, then:

> [@Guns in bars](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-in-bars/531588/142):
>
> Again, it’s worth pointing out that while there is always value in identifying speculation as such, this particular issue now has a year’s worth of actual, non-speculative data to back it up. We don’t need to merely guess that gun crime in bars will not rise… We know it hasn’t.
> 
> It would be nice for one person to say that they were wrong. It wouldn’t have to be a complete capitulation: “I still say in thE long run that crime will rise, but I admit that I was wrong about what would happen this past year.”
> 
> As opposed to the reflexive claim that the police and the newspaper reporters and editors conspired to hide the truth, such an admission would be welcome.
> 
> And honest.

Now, your point about statistical weakness certainly applies to the long haul.

But as to the specific question: in that first year, gun crime in bars did not rise. THAT is an issue on which we have reasonably full, competent data on which to rely.

Right?

That’s all I asked for. I specifically said I’d be happy with someone who said, “I still say in the long run that crime will rise, but I admit that I was wrong about what would happen this past year.”

We have enough data to answer that question confidently, don’t we?

How many people in that thread did, though?

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shodan-more-retarded-lately-or-has-he-maintained-a-consistent-level-of-retardation-all-along/610530)._