Your evidence supports that there are members of the IDF who are enthusiastically engaged with what they’re doing. I am not debating that- i think you’re right.
But it’s important to remember this absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because you haven’t seen interviews of IDF members objecting to what they are doing does not mean those members do not exist. I would expect the IDF to have systems in place to minimize the external visibility if any such objections, which makes a generalization like that dangerous.
It would be a logical fallacy to jump to such a conclusion without interviewing a randomly sampled and much larger population. It is possible you may be correct or incorrect, but you are jumping to a conclusion about a topic with insufficient data to do so.
They haven’t made any numerical claim. The argument against biased data is a fundamental one. Arguing that someone’s methodology is wrong is not arguing that the opposite of the conclusion is true. They are just saying “Facebook research don’t count”. I don’t know what statistical evidence you need for “Facebook research don’t count”.
I’ve only responded to you twice. Once to tell you that a biased sample set provides garbage data, and again to tell you I wouldn’t be arguing with someone who didn’t understand the core concepts of the conversation.
Your evidence supports that there are members of the IDF who are enthusiastically engaged with what they’re doing. I am not debating that- i think you’re right.
But it’s important to remember this absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because you haven’t seen interviews of IDF members objecting to what they are doing does not mean those members do not exist. I would expect the IDF to have systems in place to minimize the external visibility if any such objections, which makes a generalization like that dangerous.
Important point
Genocide is bad and you are right
Removed by mod
It would be a logical fallacy to jump to such a conclusion without interviewing a randomly sampled and much larger population. It is possible you may be correct or incorrect, but you are jumping to a conclusion about a topic with insufficient data to do so.
Removed by mod
The beautiful irony here is that you are believing in and spreading IDF propaganda for them.
If your sample is heavily biased, then the data from it is worthless.
Removed by mod
Nah, I’m not going to argue science and statistics with someone who clearly understands neither.
Going through these comments you’ve not presented one scientific or statistical argument. You’re basically going on vibes.
They haven’t made any numerical claim. The argument against biased data is a fundamental one. Arguing that someone’s methodology is wrong is not arguing that the opposite of the conclusion is true. They are just saying “Facebook research don’t count”. I don’t know what statistical evidence you need for “Facebook research don’t count”.
I’ve only responded to you twice. Once to tell you that a biased sample set provides garbage data, and again to tell you I wouldn’t be arguing with someone who didn’t understand the core concepts of the conversation.
The vibes thing is quite the projection, though.