norseman
VIP Member
Practical is Tactical!
Posts: 2,145
Likes: 1,853
|
Post by norseman on Jan 30, 2019 15:58:08 GMT 10
You got an evil sickness there mate!
|
|
frostbite
VIP Member
Posts: 5,438
Likes: 6,961
Member is Online
|
Post by frostbite on Jan 30, 2019 16:22:51 GMT 10
It's a badge of honour. Besides, I've seen how you look at Susan, and she's only half the woman that blonde was.
|
|
|
Post by heisenberg on Jan 30, 2019 22:42:40 GMT 10
Hi Hillbilly, Thanks for the follow-up post. I have addressed some of the issues you raised, as per the following: Your quotes (and a quote from Frostbite) are in Blue, my responses in Black: “Even academics would think "terrorism" when asked to consider "radicalisation" in these times.” . . . Hillbilly. I covered this issue in a post a few months ago. Here was my response then (with a few tiny amendments for now): There’s an entire global field of study devoted to Radicalisation Theory. I examined the reported behaviours, thought processes and development pathway of Australian Survivalists to contribute to a larger ‘academic’ debate regarding ‘non-violent radicalisation’. I don’t know what other word I could have used as it’s a bit hard to complete a 90,000-word PhD on Radicalisation Theory without using the term Radicalisation. Regarding the term ‘Radicalisation’: Though there is no one stop, everybody agrees, silver bullet definition regarding that word, what academia and the national security industry can agree on is that Radicalisation is a ‘process’ - often a behavioural and ideological process - but that’s as good as it gets. Your statement about it being, a word normally only used in reference to “terrorism”, is an understanding which has largely been media-driven over the years, and though you are not wrong, it’s a bit of a limited understanding of the issue. “Was the word chosen to shock the reader, therefore to gain interest in the piece?” . . . Hillbilly. Without being a w@nker about it, a PhD is the highest degree you can earn in a field of study and is assessed / awarded at a global level (which is why my assessors were from three different continents and it took nine months to finalise). There’s no such thing as words being chosen for ‘shock’ value in a PhD thesis, or fantasy / sketchy data. There are only strict / acceptable methods to obtain data and there is only what the data does or does not support (no real absolutes, only 'supportable' positions). The slightest hint of bias in the work's methodology and the degree can not / will not be awarded - this is also the reason why I could only write the words "unlikely to become violent” (which you referenced earlier). Yes, you are correct, ‘unlikely’ can also mean that there is always the possibility of there being an exception [see: Nick Newman] but in academic terms ‘unlikely’ is as strong a word as you are going to get in a PhD thesis (to indicate support for something). Regarding Nick Newman, I believe (because of his particular circumstances) that he had become isolated from engaging in the activities and thought processes of the typical Australian Survivalist life-style. I was therefore able to suggest that no one that is currently involved in the usual Australian Survivalist behaviours and thought processes (reflected in the identified development pathway) is likely to become a violent extremist risk (especially as no one has done so in all the time the Sub-Culture has existed in Australia). “. . . if Simon had tried to interview survivalists for his research he would have either been told where to go in no uncertain terms, or the responses would have been carefully crafted to present an image that might not have been accurate.” “Hopefully the size of the sample group and the period of time over which the survey was conducted makes this issue negligible to the overall result.” . . . Frostbite. Frostbite is completely correct (not about the mannequins . . . or is he?? ) about the size of the sample group and the 13 years (time period) of discussion content that I examined, which reinforced the results. It was the case that the behaviours and thought processes that I described had to be presented / discussed etc on a minimum of 10 occasions, by different members of the 125-sample group, to be considered as 'reoccurring' (in reality, a number of the reoccurring Australian Survivalist behaviours that I identified were presented 70+ times by unique members of the sample group). A pretty compelling indication that those behaviours are potentially ‘common’ among Australian Survivalists. If you read the Methodology Chapter (in full) you’ll know exactly how I got my data and why I had to go the way I did, in terms of the obtaining that data. In all honesty Hillbilly, there were no tricks, nothing invented, the data was what it was, and I reported / discussed it as such. If you have any other questions, please DM me. I’d be happy to talk to you. Thanks mate. Kindest regards, Simon.
|
|
|
Post by hillbilly on Jan 31, 2019 7:00:26 GMT 10
its all good. ill pm you if I need to discuss it. i guess i don't appreciate the source validity, and the crown of Authority bestowed upon thee without the blood sweat n tears that some of us have donated. y'all seem ok with it, so ill shut up n enjoy the site.
|
|
|
Post by heisenberg on Jan 31, 2019 9:00:23 GMT 10
its all good. ill pm you if I need to discuss it. i guess i don't appreciate the source validity, and the crown of Authority bestowed upon thee without the blood sweat n tears that some of us have donated. y'all seem ok with it, so ill shut up n enjoy the site. Thanks Hillbilly, I look at it like this: You (and the other members here) are the authority on being a Survivalist (perspective: inside looking out); I am just the nerd that researched / studied the Australian Survivalist Sub-Culture on the whole (perspective: outside looking in). Also, no one has a problem with David Attenborough not being a lion, when he studies and presents findings on lions. Thanks again mate. Kindest regards, SH.
|
|
Pion
Senior Member
Posts: 353
Likes: 422
|
Post by Pion on Jan 31, 2019 11:31:56 GMT 10
OMG Frosty...I suppose she agreed with everything you said? Lol
|
|
frostbite
VIP Member
Posts: 5,438
Likes: 6,961
Member is Online
|
Post by frostbite on Jan 31, 2019 11:41:40 GMT 10
OMG Frosty...I suppose she agreed with everything you said? Lol Well she never once told me to remove my hand.
|
|
|
Post by hillbilly on Jan 31, 2019 11:45:19 GMT 10
Also, no one has a problem with David Attenborough not being a lion, when he studies and presents findings on lions. Lions? they cant make embellished offerings online. cant offer multiple member profiles, opinions, to confirm their fantasies. they can only DO what they can DO. Sir David is there with them, living the event. filming every aspect. if Sir David A. did do a presentation on prepping, I bet half the world would buy bulk rice. anyways, as I said, .. its all good
|
|
|
Post by heisenberg on Jan 31, 2019 17:01:23 GMT 10
anyways, as I said, .. its all good
Thanks mate. SH.
|
|