14-year-old Texas boy arrested for bringing homemade clock

[Teallaura]

You've completely lost it, Sam.

You and I have batted more than a few times. Have I ever before called you irrational, even when it got heated? I am not telling you this to win a point. I am telling you that you may think you're making a good argument but it is anything but .

I don't even begin to know how you see affirmation in the quotes you posted. None at all is in the text.

[One Bad Pig]

That would "Hertz" I suppose.

But I'm not sure what the Hz has to do with shocking. It would depend on the wattage.

400 Hz current tends to travel through the skin instead of deeper in the flesh.

[Sam]

You've completely lost it, Sam.

You and I have batted more than a few times. Have I ever before called you irrational, even when it got heated? I am not telling you this to win a point. I am telling you that you may think you're making a good argument but it is anything but .

I don't even begin to know how you see affirmation in the quotes you posted. None at all is in the text.

Read the thread, Teal. Cow Poke was very clearly and persistently arguing that the kid intentionally designed a hoax bomb to get attention. He has continued to do so, even as you try to defend him against that claim. At the most charitable, one could say that CP is arguing, like Adrift, for the mere plausibility that this is this case, meaning that the evidence is strongly weighted in favor of the claim. In either case, my criticism would stand and your counter-claim fails.

So you got it wrong from the start and have not provided any reason to suggest that I misinterpreted Cow Poke's claims. My criticism throughout has been consistent and vocal; not once did CP suggest that his accusations were actually weaker than I was framing them, that he was just suggesting a hypothetical situation where it's merely possible that the kid would intentionally make a hoax bomb.

Those are the facts and that's the lay of the land: you might not like it that Cow Poke and Adrift seriously over reached in projecting that motive onto a 14 year old kid with no evidence that would plausibly support the claim but your criticisms should be directed at their actual argument rather than fabricating aa argument that didn't happen so you can pin the blame elsewhere.

[Cow Poke]

Read the thread, Teal. Cow Poke was very clearly and persistently arguing that the kid intentionally designed a hoax bomb to get attention. He has continued to do so, even as you try to defend him against that claim. At the most charitable, one could say that CP is arguing, like Adrift, for the mere plausibility that this is this case, meaning that the evidence is strongly weighted in favor of the claim. In either case, my criticism would stand and your counter-claim fails.

So you got it wrong from the start and have not provided any reason to suggest that I misinterpreted Cow Poke's claims. My criticism throughout has been consistent and vocal; not once did CP suggest that his accusations were actually weaker than I was framing them, that he was just suggesting a hypothetical situation where it's merely possible that the kid would intentionally make a hoax bomb.

Those are the facts and that's the lay of the land: you might not like it that Cow Poke and Adrift seriously over reached in projecting that motive onto a 14 year old kid with no evidence that would plausibly support the claim but your criticisms should be directed at their actual argument rather than fabricating aa argument that didn't happen so you can pin the blame elsewhere.

wow

[Cow Poke]

Sam, I think I'm going to have to change your name from "Mr Charts and Graphs" to "Mr Farts and Laughs"*.

It is AMAZING to me how you can look at all of this and, in every case, find the absolute most favorable (to the kid) explanation regardless of how "dog ate my homework" the explanation sounds.

You have NO IDEA what actually transpired, you have no real testimony from the teachers, very little to go on from the police, no timeline of actual events.... all you have is what the kid said transpired. When Cuban actually talked to the kid (which you haven't done) he thought it strange that the sister was in the background telling the kid what to say. Even the questions asked by law enforcement - you go by what the kid said they said. That's called "hearsay", Sam.

You don't, perchance, think this kid is the Second coming of Christ, do you?



*I'm joking - I'm really not going to call Sam that, so please no whining about name calling.

[Teallaura]

Read the thread, Teal. Cow Poke was very clearly and persistently arguing that the kid intentionally designed a hoax bomb to get attention. He has continued to do so, even as you try to defend him against that claim. At the most charitable, one could say that CP is arguing, like Adrift, for the mere plausibility that this is this case, meaning that the evidence is strongly weighted in favor of the claim. In either case, my criticism would stand and your counter-claim fails.

So you got it wrong from the start and have not provided any reason to suggest that I misinterpreted Cow Poke's claims. My criticism throughout has been consistent and vocal; not once did CP suggest that his accusations were actually weaker than I was framing them, that he was just suggesting a hypothetical situation where it's merely possible that the kid would intentionally make a hoax bomb.

Those are the facts and that's the lay of the land: you might not like it that Cow Poke and Adrift seriously over reached in projecting that motive onto a 14 year old kid with no evidence that would plausibly support the claim but your criticisms should be directed at their actual argument rather than fabricating aa argument that didn't happen so you can pin the blame elsewhere.

I have read the entire thread - your posts included (at least the first paragraph of each - I admit a few I just couldn't read. Those were not ones I replied to). The evidence does not support you at all. Nothing you quoted even remotely resembles a categorical claim. The facts are you have grossly misrepresented CP's argument and neither he nor Adrift that I saw 'over reached', but you most certainly have.

[Sam]

I have read the entire thread - your posts included (at least the first paragraph of each - I admit a few I just couldn't read. Those were not ones I replied to). The evidence does not support you at all. Nothing you quoted even remotely resembles a categorical claim. The facts are you have grossly misrepresented CP's argument and neither he nor Adrift that I saw 'over reached', but you most certainly have.

And this is how I know that you're just digging deeper without actually forming a coherent argument: Adrift absolutely and categorically argued that the kid intended to make a "movie bomb"; when I called him on that, writing:

Adrift replied:

Yes.

That post, by the way, got an "Amen" from both Cow Poke and yourself.

At no point have I misrepresented CP or Adrift and neither of them disputed (or have disputed since) my claim that they were arguing that the kid did intentionally make the clock project to look like a "movie bomb". And, at this point, you're only line of defense is to mischaracterize what both actually wrote and claim that it's irrational to have read either of them as saying that the kid did intend to make a "movie bomb" or that it's plausible that was his intention.

At this point, I don't expect any sort of revelation or epiphany, much less an acknowledgement that you've created a false history in order to deflect blame for how the argument went down. It's just an incredibly sad display.

[Teallaura]

And this is how I know that you're just digging deeper without actually forming a coherent argument: Adrift absolutely and categorically argued that the kid intended to make a "movie bomb"; when I called him on that, writing:



Adrift replied:



That post, by the way, got an "Amen" from both Cow Poke and yourself.

At no point have I misrepresented CP or Adrift and neither of them disputed (or have disputed since) my claim that they were arguing that the kid did intentionally make the clock project to look like a "movie bomb". And, at this point, you're only line of defense is to mischaracterize what both actually wrote and claim that it's irrational to have read either of them as saying that the kid did intend to make a "movie bomb" or that it's plausible that was his intention.

At this point, I don't expect any sort of revelation or epiphany, much less an acknowledgement that you've created a false history in order to deflect blame for how the argument went down. It's just an incredibly sad display.

This was the part I had in mind when I amenned the post:

That's great evidence Sam.

Dude, I'm literally sitting here shaking my head like "What!??" I'm not exaggerating when I tell you that I sincerely and honestly don't get how you can't get this. Really I don't. It defies all comprehension and logic to me. I feel like I'm in Bizarroland or something.

You know, this isn't really an issue that I really care that much about. Believe whatever you want to believe. I don't think it makes any sense, but I got no agenda to sell, and I'm not going to lose any sleep if I don't convince you otherwise. Again, the whole thing is completely weird and ridiculous to me. So, you know, whatever. I'm out.

I did forget that Adrift had made it categorical - but CP did not. Adrift caveated that he did not necessarily think the kid had done so maliciously, which set off a long, nonsensical argument from you that he must mean malice when he did not.

No 'false history' (incidentally, I've been letting the little insinuations about me lying pass - stop making them, now) just one minor error (I did say 'that I saw' so I did NOT make a categorical statement about Adrift's posts - and you haven't come close to proving me wrong about CP's) and the temerity to disagree with you.

[Cow Poke]

And this is how I know that you're just digging deeper without actually forming a coherent argument:

projector-1443075.jpg

[Sam]

This was the part I had in mind when I amenned the post:



I did forget that Adrift had made it categorical - but CP did not. Adrift caveated that he did not necessarily think the kid had done so maliciously, which set off a long, nonsensical argument from you that he must mean malice when he did not.

No 'false history' (incidentally, I've been letting the little insinuations about me lying pass - stop making them, now) just one minor error (I did say 'that I saw' so I did NOT make a categorical statement about Adrift's posts - and you haven't come close to proving me wrong about CP's) and the temerity to disagree with you.

have made the claims I've attributed to them means one of two things:

(A) You're arguing that Adrift's categorical statement was not "over-reaching", making your defense regarding Cow Poke's statements incoherent

or

(B) You're just digging in, demanding to see where I substantiate my claim and then simply ignoring it when I do.

Neither one would allow you to maintain your initial criticism. If Adrift and Cow Poke have even been merely arguing that it's plausible that the kid intended to make a "movie bomb", my criticism stands and the "crazed tangent" is based on what those two have actually written. With Adrift, that point has been explicitly substantiated. With Cow Poke, his position has been clearly substantiated throughout the section I've referenced. Finally, we can point to Post #419:

And you're the one confidently asserting that this kid intended to make a hoax bomb "to get attention".

I believe I have said that "hoax bomb" is a LEGAL term, and I don't think that's what the kid was intending. He was building what, in effect, was a "hollywood bomb", or "movie bomb".

If you had stayed in the realm of "the teacher's initial response was appropriate", we wouldn't have had any disagreement. If you had stayed in the realm of "the police officers' initial response was appropriate", we would have clearly disagreed but it would be a rational disagreement. But you snarked about the build quality of the kid's project and then joined Adrift in arguing that the kid had intended to make something that looks like a bomb.

I gave my honest opinion, and you turn it into "snark". Grow up.

so if you're going to argue against speculating, based on the fact that we weren't there, you've got to retract what you've said regarding the kid's intentions.

I'm basing my opinion on the OVERALL incident, not pretending that the cops and school officials are a bunch of liars or idiots.

There, again, you have Cow Poke arguing that the kid intended to make a "hollywood bomb" or "movie bomb" and described my assertion that he "joined Adrift in arguing that the kid had intended to make something that looks like a bomb" as giving his "honest opinion". Cow Poke, when I said that he has to "retract what you've said regarding the kid's intentions" did not deny that he was, indeed, making a determination on the kid's intentions. Rather, he said that he's basing his opinion (that the kid intended to make a "movie bomb") on the "OVERALL incident".

I said from the start that you should just read the thread, Teal. Even if you persist in denying that Cow Poke was actually accusing the kid of intending to make a "movie bomb", you cannot

[klaus54]

Amperage.

Actually wattage...

OK, for a fixed voltage you are correct Sir.

[klaus54]

You've completely lost it, Sam.

You and I have batted more than a few times. Have I ever before called you irrational, even when it got heated? I am not telling you this to win a point. I am telling you that you may think you're making a good argument but it is anything but .

I don't even begin to know how you see affirmation in the quotes you posted. None at all is in the text.

What was your average?

More than .300?

[klaus54]

400 Hz current tends to travel through the skin instead of deeper in the flesh.

And very high frequency (like 10s of thousand cycle/s) has little or no effect, or so I've hertz.

[Cow Poke]

Actually wattage...

OK, for a fixed voltage you are correct Sir.

Well, power (watts) is amps (current) times volts. So you can have a really high voltage (50,000) and extremely low amperage (Van De Graaff) and get nothing more than a mild shock.

I was demonstrating this one day in class, and had the VDGG charging up, intending to point my finger at it and direct the lightening. While speaking to the class, I bent over to pick up the Ohms Law chart, and a big blue spark smacked me in the tip of my nose. YEEEEEEOOOOOOOCHHHHHH!!!!! (But here I am, safe and sane* as ever)

So I'm gonna stick with it's the amps that kill ya. 100 mA can stop your heart - 2 A can kill you easily.



*[looking around to see if Rogue is here]

[Cow Poke]

And very high frequency (like 10s of thousand cycle/s) has little or no effect, or so I've hertz.

I think we should rent a car and take this show on the road!