# It is implausible that pchaos is a lawyer and he should stop claiming to be one **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 14, 2013, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316 "2013-02-14T20:34:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/161 "2013-02-15T20:25:36Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > Wait, you think he’s a Mormon? no, I don’t think the Mormons or the JW would accept pchaos - they have standards of being able to atleast make recognizable (yet illogical and pleading) arguments. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/162 "2013-02-15T20:26:36Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Right, and he can’t be punished separately for both burglary and breaking and entering. woohoo! I learned something in a pchaos thread! ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/163 "2013-02-15T20:30:36Z")
> [@simster](#): > > woohoo! I learned something in a pchaos thread! Correction: You learned something _in spite of it being_ a **pchaos** thread. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/164 "2013-02-15T20:32:00Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Correction: You learned something _in spite of it being_ a **pchaos** thread. I will accept both as being accurate - what a paradox! We’ll also note that pchaos was not involved in the conversation itself, so his presence is immaterial to the learning that happened. Had he been involved, there is a good chance that nothing would have been learned, and we would have to have a new definition of the word “burglary”. ---
**Author:** ![pchaos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/258eb7/32.png) [@pchaos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pchaos)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/165 "2013-02-15T20:38:01Z")
> [@simster](#): > > I still think he did too much lds back at berkley… part of the free speech movement and all. Minimal, I smoked but didn’t inhale. Apparently, you are proud that the scientific method has a way of testing and double-checking facts. Also, it’s a logical system. But if that’s such a good system of analysis, you would think that you could come up with a better philosophy than Ayn Rand’s. Okay, that’s a bad example, it seems like both theists and atheists dislike her. But to simply leave it at each person becomes more authentic, that also says little or nothing. Since a coherent philosophy really hasn’t emerged from atheists, the general public will infer that the scientific method or whatever method an atheist chooses to use isn’t that valuable. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/166 "2013-02-15T20:40:29Z")
You can’t articulate your own opinions and you can’t understand the opinions of atheists, so why would anyone believe you know what the general public thinks? ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/167 "2013-02-15T20:41:04Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > Minimal, I smoked but didn’t inhale. > > Apparently, you are proud that the scientific method has a way of testing and double-checking facts. Also, it’s a logical system. > > But if that’s such a good system of analysis, you would think that you could come up with a better philosophy than Ayn Rand’s. Okay, that’s a bad example, it seems like both theists and atheists dislike her. > > But to simply leave it at each person becomes more authentic, that also says little or nothing. > > Since a coherent philosophy really hasn’t emerged from atheists, the general public will infer that the scientific method or whatever method an atheist chooses to use isn’t that valuable. wow - the ignorance is strong in this one. ---
**Author:** ![pancakes3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ba9def/32.png) [@pancakes3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pancakes3)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/168 "2013-02-15T20:51:07Z")
HAHAHA. Yes, science and logic is a HORRIBLE system of analysis. Religion, intuition, and feelings is much better. Let’s make a list of everything that science has wrought and compare it to what feelings have brought forth. And btw, wtf do you think “intuition” is other than logical inferences? ---
**Author:** ![Toucanna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3bc359/32.png) [@Toucanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Toucanna)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/169 "2013-02-15T20:52:07Z")
I am not a touc, a toucan or a can. I might be something that is an anagram of aacnnotu, but, I can’t be arsed to figure out what. **AK84** is a lawyer, but only he can say if he’s an A, a K, or an 84. I think we’d all be happier if we ignored **pchaos**. I know I am, now that I do. I don’t need any more chaos in my life and I especially don’t need p(chaos)\*. - [Welcome to the NSR Physiome Project! | Interagency Modeling and Analysis Group](http://www.physiome.org/Course/Bioen498a/wk4/StatSymbols.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![pchaos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/258eb7/32.png) [@pchaos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pchaos)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/170 "2013-02-15T20:56:11Z")
> [@pancakes3](#): > > Yes, science and logic is a HORRIBLE system of analysis. Religion, intuition, and feelings is much better. Let’s make a list of everything that science has wrought and compare it to what feelings have brought forth. If science and logic were really that valuable they would be able generate a coherent world view. Otherwise, I will think of them as no more valuable than money, it is a means to an end and nothing more. ---
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/171 "2013-02-15T20:56:19Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > Since a coherent philosophy really hasn’t emerged from atheists, the general public will infer that the scientific method or whatever method an atheist chooses to use isn’t that valuable. How’s this for comparison: “We were told that faith could remove mountains, but no one believed it; we are now told that the atomic bomb can remove mountains, and everyone believes it.”—Betrand Russell Science is all around us, look around, boy-ee. If you still doubt, would you volunteer for ground zero if the US starts back up its nuclear testing program again? Think you would be around to tell us the scientific method isn’t all that valuable if you did? We’d all be reading about you in the Sunday funny papers of the god damn clown that amazed all when he raised his own bar of stupidity to yet another level. ---
**Author:** ![leftfield6](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leftfield6/32/18780_2.png) [@leftfield6](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leftfield6)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/172 "2013-02-15T20:56:22Z")
Ladies and gentlemen, we have before us a complete and total asshole. That he happens to have claimed (directly or indirectly) to have been a lawyer, and the stated fact that he believes in god are both truly sideline issues. He’s really just not all that sharp in general. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/173 "2013-02-15T21:00:16Z")
> [@leftfield6](#): > > Ladies and gentlemen, we have before us a complete and total asshole. That he happens to have claimed (directly or indirectly) to have been a lawyer, and the stated fact that he believes in god are both truly sideline issues. He’s really just not all that sharp in general. qft [QUOTE=foghorn leghorn] I say, I say, that **pchaos** is about as sharp as a bowlin’ ball [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![pchaos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/258eb7/32.png) [@pchaos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pchaos)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/174 "2013-02-15T21:07:10Z")
> [@razncain](#): > > How’s this for comparison: “We were told that faith could remove mountains, but no one believed it; we are now told that the atomic bomb can remove mountains, and everyone believes it.”—Betrand Russell > > Science is all around us, look around, boy-ee. If you still doubt, would you volunteer for ground zero if the US starts back up its nuclear testing program again? Think you would be around to tell us the scientific method isn’t all that valuable if you did? > > We’d all be reading about you in the Sunday funny papers of the god damn clown that amazed all when he raised his own bar of stupidity to yet another level. Okay, so you’re brighter than me, where’s the coherent philosophy. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/175 "2013-02-15T21:08:42Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > Okay, so you’re brighter than me, where’s the coherent philosophy. Define “coherent” for us, please. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/176 "2013-02-15T21:10:50Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Define “coherent” for us, please. I think that is the one word that he will never be able to define - in fact - the antonym for coherent is **pchaos**. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/177 "2013-02-15T21:15:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > **Acquitting on X and convicting on Y** > This is a consistent jury verdict. That is, the jury pretty obviously found elements B and C proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and did not find element A proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The accused is sentenced for Y, and the state is barred from retrying him on X or Y again in the future. > > … > > **Hanging on X and convicting on Y** > Also treated as an inconsistent verdict. The accused will be sentenced on Y; the state cannot retry on X or Y. I’ve a clarification request: How is the first verdict consistent but the second not? In the first, we assume the jury concluded elements B and C were met beyond a reasonable doubt (meeting the conditions of lesser offense Y) but A was not (requiring acquittal on X), but doesn’t the second suggest the jury agreed on B and C but simply could not on A? This does not strike me as an inconsistency on the jury’s part (as if they had convincted on the greater offense but acquitted on the lesser), unless hanging in general is considered inconsistent. Actually, on further review, there’s an inconsistency in that you say _Y is a “lesser-included offense” of X_, but later _They could not reach a verdict on lesser-included offense X_. I honestly appreciate your effort to explain the principle, and I recognize the ease with something like this can be undone by typos (I myself occasionally forget to type the word “not” in a sentence, thus expressing the exact opposite of my intent) and if you’re so inclined, I invite you to review and repost. I have no questions or comments regarding pchaos. By all indications, it would be a complete waste of time. ---
**Author:** ![pchaos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/258eb7/32.png) [@pchaos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pchaos)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/178 "2013-02-15T21:16:49Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Define “coherent” for us, please. Look atheists are proud of their intelligence and they should be. But they can’t stop there. Ordinary dummies like me, we are faced with a choice. On the one hand we have man’s brilliance and on the other hand we have God’s brilliance. Since I’m a dummy and I figure other men aren’t that much brighter, I’ll go with God’s brilliance. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/179 "2013-02-15T21:21:44Z")
So, basically what you’re saying is that you can imagine the existence of a being that is smarter than you. Hmm. Doesn’t seem like that would take much of an imagination. ---
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2013, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316/180 "2013-02-15T21:22:19Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > Okay, so you’re brighter than me, where’s the coherent philosophy. That’s not saying much, so I can’t take it as a compliment. Science grew out of a philosophy, but it won’t be coherent to you. I’m sorry if you’d been misled by a false education, or the lack of one, but don’t cry on our shoulders and repeat the same records. You’ve played them over and over how many times now on various threads? I realize you’re probably only limited to the BBQ pit now, because some of the moderators have got plenty to work with now to know that you’re a troll, and a stupid troll at that, and it won’t take much to send your ass packing. I’m surprised they have given you this many chances. I realize you’ve been dealt a terrible hand in life, and you were born with only so much to work with, but nothing anybody here can do for you. You contribute nothing. And please don’t play that “nothing” record again either. Quit acting like a little whiny snot-nosed Nancy boy, and go back to playing a lawyer on the internet, but preferably on a MB that is gullible enough to believe you because it isn’t here, jackass. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-is-implausible-that-pchaos-is-a-lawyer-and-he-should-stop-claiming-to-be-one/650316.md?page=10)