Khelif and another boxer, featherweight Lin Yu-Ting of Chinese Taipei, have been fighting under a cloud in France after the Algerian’s opening victory over Angela Carini, who quit after 46 seconds.
The article says the IOC honored what was on her passport. I don’t think there was any valid concern raised, it was just the Russian body doing Russian things.
Yes, they chose not to investigate. I suppose one might call the allegations unfounded, but without evidence to the contrary they can’t reasonably be called false.
That’s not comparable here. Chromosomes and hormone levels are easily testable. (I don’t know what the IOC’s actual policy is, but I’m sure it’s something measurable.)
There’s plenty of evidence to the contrary. Teacups are man-made objects, rocket launches are closely monitored, and no rocket is known to have launched a teapot into that orbit. It isn’t absolutely impossible that something very much like a teapot formed there spontaneously, that a teapot was secretly launched there for no apparent reason, or that extraterrestrials placed a teapot there, but again there is evidence that these events are very unlikely to have happened. Russell’s goal was to illustrate that the burden of proof should be on the one making unfalsifiable claims, but he didn’t pick a good example - the lack of a plausible mechanism for the teapot to arrive in that orbit was even stronger evidence before spaceflight.
There’s plenty of evidence to the contrary. Teacups are man-made objects, rocket launches are closely monitored, and no rocket is known to have launched a teapot into that orbit.
None of that is evidence that the teapot doesn’t exist.
China launched the teapot on a rideshare rocket that delivered 60 other payloads. It’s top secret, and the US Gov doesn’t want to publicize that the Chinese have developed a space tug capable of inserting a 200g teacup into a mars transfer orbit.
Another philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, states that a falsehood lies at the heart of Russell’s argument. Russell’s argument assumes that there is no evidence against the teapot, but Plantinga disagrees:
Clearly we have a great deal of evidence against teapotism. For example, as far as we know, the only way a teapot could have gotten into orbit around the sun would be if some country with sufficiently developed space-shot capabilities had shot this pot into orbit. No country with such capabilities is sufficiently frivolous to waste its resources by trying to send a teapot into orbit. Furthermore, if some country had done so, it would have been all over the news; we would certainly have heard about it. But we haven’t. And so on. There is plenty of evidence against teapotism.
Research the SRY gene. It’s why she “failed” a test that wasn’t looking for it. She was born female. She is female. Her passport says she’s female. The IOC says she’s female. The ONLY people making the claim are Russians and their bad science and conservatives and their bad faith.
They can reasonably be called false just as they are about any other Olympian. They verified she was born a woman, same as they do with any other competitor.
Just because someone makes an accusation with zero evidence doesn’t mean there needs to be any sort of investigation.
The article says the IOC honored what was on her passport. I don’t think there was any valid concern raised, it was just the Russian body doing Russian things.
Yes, they chose not to investigate. I suppose one might call the allegations unfounded, but without evidence to the contrary they can’t reasonably be called false.
The whole world:
“There is no evidence that shes is anything but a natural born woman. It’s clear this is fabricated outrage.”
You:
“They didn’t provide evidence of no evidence, so I am going to keep believing this fabricated outrage because I like being angry and refuse to stop.”
There’s a teacup orbiting the sun between Mars and Jupiter. There’s no evidence to the contrary, so it can’t reasonably be called false.
That’s not comparable here. Chromosomes and hormone levels are easily testable. (I don’t know what the IOC’s actual policy is, but I’m sure it’s something measurable.)
There’s plenty of evidence to the contrary. Teacups are man-made objects, rocket launches are closely monitored, and no rocket is known to have launched a teapot into that orbit. It isn’t absolutely impossible that something very much like a teapot formed there spontaneously, that a teapot was secretly launched there for no apparent reason, or that extraterrestrials placed a teapot there, but again there is evidence that these events are very unlikely to have happened. Russell’s goal was to illustrate that the burden of proof should be on the one making unfalsifiable claims, but he didn’t pick a good example - the lack of a plausible mechanism for the teapot to arrive in that orbit was even stronger evidence before spaceflight.
There’s a manhole cover out there that isn’t on a single NASA manifest either.
That’s an urban legend.
Does snopes have anything about a teacup?
None of that is evidence that the teapot doesn’t exist.
China launched the teapot on a rideshare rocket that delivered 60 other payloads. It’s top secret, and the US Gov doesn’t want to publicize that the Chinese have developed a space tug capable of inserting a 200g teacup into a mars transfer orbit.
Seriously, dude?
Reread my post. I understood the reference.
Do you? Because you are making arguments he refuted decades ago.
From your Wikipedia article itself:
Cool. You read the Wikipedia article. Let me know when you actually read Russell.
Research the SRY gene. It’s why she “failed” a test that wasn’t looking for it. She was born female. She is female. Her passport says she’s female. The IOC says she’s female. The ONLY people making the claim are Russians and their bad science and conservatives and their bad faith.
To be fair, the Russians making the accusations are also malicious.
They can reasonably be called false just as they are about any other Olympian. They verified she was born a woman, same as they do with any other competitor.
Just because someone makes an accusation with zero evidence doesn’t mean there needs to be any sort of investigation.
Neither can the allegation that I’m making right now, that you are a pedophile.