That's just Stereo with a sub woofer output I think Todd.

Cut it away
Somebody cut away this desperate heart
Cut it away
And help me find my way back to the start
Yeah, before I knew what I was looking for
Yeah, when we were lovers and nothing more
I wanted you
And I did everything that I could do
To capture you
I let you see
The part of me
You'd want to see
A fantasy
I'm finding now
I don't know how
To make it good
I wish I could
Cut it away
This crazy longing for something more
Cut it away
The question I don't have an answer for
Why I hunger
For something I can't see
Cut it away
The dream I wanted life to be
I know
I've got to let you go
I know
You should have left a long time ago
Protected by the night
Two cities lay
Two hearts, two lives
Connected by our sight
Worlds away
Two hearts, two lives
Inspected by the light
Two hearts, two cities in decay
Two lives
Repair them as we might
Two hearts
Just go on crumbling
Now come on
Cut it away
I want to cut away this thing inside
Cut it away
This thing that hid from you and schemed and lied
I know
I've got to let you go
I know
You should have left a long time ago
Cut it away
Somebody cut away this desperate heart
Cut it away
Before it tears my whole life apart
I love you
I love you still
I do
I always will

Errrr....larousse, are you trying your best to make my ignore list?

I thought I already was.

I'll persevere.

*****you are ignoring this user*****

Well the events of the past day still have me very upset and there is only one thing I have to say to each and every one of you: you can *********************************

Edited by Justuss (11/22/06 10:22 PM)

Very funny Pio

I am of the opinion that 99.9% of cited statistics are bogus.



Do you have a source for this? Todd and I are still debating the 85% recovery rate. Actually cc46 had compiled some really great statistics - probably the most credible I have ever seen. Wonder if I can find them. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

I dunno about the 85% either. Given that Pittman says that the only cause of divorce in long term marriages is infidelity and also that the divorce rate is 50% it sort of doesn't see right to me.

I guess with the 0.05% I am guessing that the chances of recovering a marriage where there is ongoing contact is like the chances of finding a sasquatch or of KiwiJ actually being a FWW.

So on the basis of that, I guess my 0.05% is a little optimistic.

So the odds are 20:1 against your statistic being correct.

The problem I have with the Pittman (or Harley statistic for that matter) is that the 85% is based on a population of those who sought counseling. There is no speculation as to the percentage of marriages infected by infidelity that sought counseling. I further complicate this by considering the economic factor. Since counseling is expensive, how many don't go because they can't afford it. Or mind set - many people simply don't believe in counseling. So what percentage of the total infidel population seeks counseling of which 85% survive? Nobody (except cc46) seems to hazard a guess. Does Dr. Glass have a stat?

Interestingly I was watching National Geographic last night and there was a program about bigfoot. There was a portion about a guy (can't remember his name) who has dedicated his entire life in the search for bigfoot. He is quite old now so I guess he has been looking a long time. This caused several things to occur to me. I won't go into them other than to say I'm not the only one who won't remember his name.

To an extent, I'm this same way about big bang theory. So we learn about the birth of the universe - will it affect who wins the Super Bowl? Don't think so. Then I think about universities. All that knowledge stored away but so inefficiently transferred. Did I mention we heavily subsidize a local university? We are spending megamoney to fund research on something that is likely impossible to build but, more importantly, we know we can never use. And it is comical to watch this great team of doctors. The stories I could tell. But I'm rambling now.

Actually I agree Pio. I don't think that those who go for counselling are representative of the general population. I always used to assume counselling was for the feeble minded.

But why do you think that more people who are screwing around would seek counselling than those who don't seek counselling? Do you think 85% is too high? I do just by looking at the divorce rate.

At best, 85% is a convoluted statistic. People who are in counseling are, by definition, looking for an alternative to separation/divorce. So only 85% who don't want divorce (if we believe the number) are successful. That is both good and bad. I don't think people who seek counseling are a representative demographic. I think they are highly skewed to a certain education/religion/economic/family history combination of factors. Even cultural factors may have bearing. I have no opinion on this but maybe larousse can tell us if a large percentage of Mexican couples affected by infidelity seek counseling as compared to American couples. I simply don't know.

The only comforting factor in all this is that, since we are here asking these questions, we can likely consider ourselves part of the fortunate group who have the 85% chance of success. On the other hand, it is like big bang theory. What difference does it make what anybody else did/does? If the chances were 1:1,000,000 instead of 1:8, would that change your plans? I think that 97.36% of statistics are designed with the sole purpose of selling books with another 2% intended to write nice papers so we can get expense paid trips to conferences to present/hear them - but don't quote me on those percentages - I could be off by up to two orders of magnitude.

i agree Pio.

I was trying to think of a good analogy. I guess it is a bit like doing an extensive study and discovering that 85% of people who attend Mass are Catholic - and then trying to attach significance to the finding.

My favorite statistic of all time:

100% of all car-train accidents involve automobiles.

so the real question is what percentage of people who divorce get counselling?

There should be stats on that.

I think cc46 has those numbers. I don't know that she would want to put them on the forum. I wish she would. I don't think she is cc46 any more either. I think she is ccbis or some such. Even if she won't share the numbers, I really would like to know what "bis" stands for.

why wouldn't she share?

Because she's stingy?

I really don't know. She might. I know she has done extensive research. Maybe she is waiting to publish a book. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

I think she may not be comfortable with the basis of her research. She is a scientist and quite a perfectionist when it comes to the validity of data.

Unlike the 0.05% of people who just throw statistics around carelessly. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

carelessly or recklessly?