Texas A&M Researcher Disputes New Game Violence Study

Earlier today GamePolitics reported on a study published in the journal Pediatrics which details U.S. and Japanese longitudinal studies suggesting that violent video game play leads to increased aggression in children.

Of the research, Iowa State professor Craig Anderson, whose work constitutes the American segment of the report, said:

We now have conclusive evidence that playing violent video games has harmful effects on children and adolescents.

But, in a letter to Pediatrics, Christopher Ferguson, a researcher at Texas A&M International University, has called the Anderson study into question. Ferguson claims that the research contains "numerous flaws" and disputes its meaningfulness. Ferguson writes:

In the literature review the authors suggest that research on video game violence is consistent when this is hardly the case. The authors here simply ignore a wide body of research which conflicts with their views…

The authors fail to control for relevant "third" variables that could easily explain the weak correlations that they find. Family violence exposure for instance, peer group influences, certainly genetic influences on aggressive behavior are just a few relevant variables that ought either be controlled or at minimum acknowledged as alternate causal agents for (very small) link between video games and aggression…

Lastly the authors link their results to youth violence in ways that are misleading and irresponsible. The authors do not measure youth violence in their study. The [research tool used] is not a violence measure, nor does it even measure pathological aggression. Rather this measure asks for hypothetical responses to potential aggressive situations, not actual aggressive behaviors.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    mdo7 says:


    I know I know, it’s ridiculous is it?  Did you in Japan the first Gears of war went platinum and have a lot of fanbase in Japan.  Seeing Gears of War 2 banned in Japan is going to drive many Japanese fan of that game to riot, oh boy tell me when the Japanese fan of that game start to rebel against the ban.

  2. 0
    mdo7 says:


    uh actually a lot of shooting video game does a good job in Japan.  Did you forget about Medal of Honor and Call of Duty getting best hit in Japan?  Did you forget Tom Clancy game in Japan like Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, and Splinter Cell earned "Ubisoft the best" in Japan?  A lot of American game has been well-loved in Japan even first person or third person shooter.  You might want to look at gamefaq more often, some of our game made in America may do a better job in Japan. 

  3. 0
    Kincyr says:

    huh, I thought I read somewhere that Japanese gamers weren’t that interested in realistic violence. Oh wait, realistic… self-defeating arguement. My bad.

    岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」

  4. 0
    Quarantine says:

    People die everyday and Abortion is part of that. Big fucking deal. Would you rather have a child aborted and maybe at the most just fade into darkness, or left outside in the cold or in a garbage bag after birth?

    Anyway, on topic, I think aggression comes from violent video games when you play against other people. You might throw a fit when you lose against a computer and destroy your own property, but losing against another human being is totally different. Losing is part of life, but it’s never that easy to be aware of it’s reality unless you are "Down to Earth". And from my experience, hardly anyone is.

    Another thing is funny is that my local news station reported this study saying "The violent video games for Children". LoL! I’ll never get over that.

    "Mommy, look! GRAND THEFT AUTO"

    "Sure, Honey! Sounds great!"

    Mom never realizes the title of the game itself is Mature.


    "Because this town is under the stranglehold of a few tight eyed Tree Huggers who would rather play Hacky Sack than lock up the homeless" — Birch Barlow

  5. 0
    pure_drivel says:

    I love how easily this discussion was sidetracked to abortion. Hilarious.

    I actually have a BA in Sociology. Note, I’m not claiming to be a Sociologist, just to have studied the discipline. I can tell you from my experience that designing a comprehensive longitudinal study to determine any causal link between the consumption of violent video games and actual violent behavior would cost an enormous amount of time and money. I actually designed a hypothetical study to test just that as part of my senior thesis.

    I think the most important criticism of this study that it only measures "hypothetical responses to potential aggressive situations, not actual aggressive behaviors." The conclusion that this study makes is that the way the study subject thinks they would handle the hypothetical situation will translate into actual aggressive or violent behavior. The bottom line is, there’s still no evidence of any causal link between playing violent video games and actual real world violence.

  6. 0
    Noir-Okami says:


    These stupid news organizations keep on claiming violent video games lead to increased aggression. Even though the idea is very shaky at best. They make it sound like it is set in stone. I saw the news last night for my region, and they have a ‘health report.’ They made it sound absolute, where if you play violent video games that are T rating or higher, you are going to go out and go on a killing spree. That basically encompasses all of the high school student population. Yet, only a few nutballs go on the rapages.

    This, of course, being pathetic. They never hear the other side of the story or the flimsiness. Can anyone say, ‘airhorn?’

    I’m venting, aren’t I?…

  7. 0
    mdo7 says:


    uh, actually it’s the opposite. 

    http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/ps2/image/466217.html (Look at the Japanese cover for GTA 3, they have Capcom’s greatest hit)

    http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/ps2/image/561545.html (Vice City Japanese cover, they got Capcom’s greatest hit also)

    http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/ps2/image/914983.html (same thing for San Andreas)


    I think GTA does a good job in Japan, it has a good fanbase and why do you think Saint Row in Japan got Platinum collection on it’s list.  It’s telling me that GTA and it’s clone did a good job in Japan.

  8. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    Prof. Ferguson pretty much destroyed any credibility this "study" may have had, that is, if an agenda-pushing moron wasn’t in charge of it to begin with.

    Texas A&M > Iowa State in academics and athletics.

    Back in Black from a forced hiatus by Hurricane Gustav.

    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(0-3), LSU(3-0)

  9. 0
    Leet Gamer Jargon says:

    Wouldn’t that be Number 4? And would you really shoot your grandmother in the face if she told you to kill someone? To tell you the truth, I would either choose Number 2 or call up the nearest retirement home/insane asylum (I’m a goody-two-shoes, so I’d choose the nonviolent or less evil/most "good" option).

    P.S. I took the G.O.A.T. and was told to be a Vault Chaplain. Sweetness.

    Game on, brothers and sisters.

  10. 0
    Leet Gamer Jargon says:

    WHOO!! Go Chris Ferguson! Thank you for saying what we’ve been saying all along….Not meaning to be sarcastic, though…I..I’m just glad somebody else agrees with us gamers. And, of course, knows what needs to be studied if a fair and true conclusion is to be reached.

    Game on, brothers and sisters.

  11. 0

    Quotes from children typically garner a response along the lines of "Those kids don’t know anything about what affects them! GRRRR!"


    -Remember kids, personal responsibility is for losers! -The Buck Stops Here.

  12. 0
    sqlrob says:

    I don’t remember how I answered. Is there any way to go back and check?

    I’m guessing 2, since I was going for a goody two shoes. Next playthrough will be evil.


  13. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    Lets see here,


    The Violence in Videogames in Japan is lower than America.


    While also in Japan there is higher sexual themes in PC games thanks to their Hentai culture.


    There is a tighter gun control in Japan than America.


    Followed by that the Virginia Tech shootings Violent Videogames were blamed but it was found out later that the killer did not play Violent Videogames.


    There have been times in America and also around the world where people have done horrible things in the name of religion but no one ever blames religion but when it comes to someone blaming their behaviour on Videogames the Violent Videogames are used as a Scapegoat to society ills.


    Also there are clear Classification ratings on Videogames nowdays that are there to HELP parents know about a certain game before they or their children/teenagers play it.


    I can point out some of the flaws in this study and how quick they are to try and Generalize to find links between Violence in Videogames and Violence in Real life.


    Somebody get my copy of "Grand Theft Childhood" so we can go though all these variables…


    I feel that even though people ditch our findings all because we are gamers, I feel that there is a case for bias against those who did the research because they are under pressure to make their research more meaningful so they try to do anything to find a direct link between Violence in Videogames and Violence in Children and Adolecence and single out Violent Videogames as the cause while briefly skimming over the other causes like family life and school bullying as the other possible (and more realistic) causes.


    Hell, even the violence in the news is more damaging for children than Violent Videogames because the kids and teenagers know it was real. Just read Grand Theft Childhood for example and read what the children quoted in that book.


    All that I am saying that even though the book Grand Theft Childhood never really said that Videogames were or were not the real causes in some violent actions among children, it DID say that there are many other more influences in the behaviour of children and adolecence and it is different from every person, and that is why you CAN’T point the finger at Violence in Videogames because there is so many other influences and factors that play in a person’s life.


    that is all that I am just saying….you just need to read the book Grand Theft Childhood because that book was written by researchers that did not take either side of the bedate and focused more on trying to highlight the videogame research and many of it’s conflicting arguments.





  14. 0
    Mr. Stodern says:

    You know, were there to be an actual debate over the validity/dangerousness of video games, it would be very much in our favor that studies like this latest one are always flawed.

    Unfortunately, there really isn’t a debate. There’s we gamers, the game industry itself, and those who attack both for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with games themselves or any of their aspects. Politicians want to look like they’re doing something, the media wants attention, and Jack…well, he just plain loves being an asshole.

    So, it really doesn’t matter what anyone claims to prove. It all sense of the word, it means nothing.

  15. 0

    I wonder if the kids were getting their virtual asses kicked…I mean, it can get frustrating, losing over and over again, and when you are made to continue playing, it gets worse. Anger caused by frustration can look pretty simillar to agression.

    -Remember kids, personal responsibility is for losers! -The Buck Stops Here.

  16. 0
    CyberSkull says:

    Here is a question from the study:

    Your grandmother invites you over for tea. When you get there she gives you a gun and orders you to kill someone. Do you:
    1. Obey your elder.
    2. Refuse and offer up a prized possession for the target’s life.
    3. Ask for a bigger gun. After all, you don’t want to miss.
    4. Throw your tea in her face.

  17. 0
    mogbert says:

    Deep, you have to really screw up, a lot, and for a long time, before getting repremanded. The fact that he wasn’t just suspended was due to him being very bad, for a very long time, showing no remorse and saying he would never change. You don’t attack the family of another lawyer because the other lawyer was just doing their job and defending their client. That goes so far beyond the pale as to be shocking. Not liking another lawyer because they used low down tactics is one thing, but attacking lawyers because of what the defendant did is real low, and then harrassing their families and sending out press releases accusing them of the same thing you were accusing their client of… it’s just insane. This guy is like the reincarnation of L Ron Hubbard, convinced that if he tells the same lie enough that enough people will believe it and it will become the truth.

    Other nono’s like lying to judges and lying to the media were also bad, but could be understood by others on some level. Not approved of, but not litterally insane.

  18. 0
    Shoehorn Oplenty says:

    "The authors fail to control for relevant "third" variables that could easily explain the weak correlations that they find."

    This is a massive hole in the studies methodology, and one which I think undermines any and all confidence in it’s results.

    Did they allow for and adjust results accordingly for children whose parents split up in the 3-6 months between video game exposure and "data" (if you can call the descriptive answers young children give as data…) collection? Did they allow for kids who were bullied at school the day before they were asked questions? How about kids who grew up with a parent or sibling with a violent temper? Kids who grew up exposed to crime? Drugs?

    Pfft, forget all of those things! It’s the video games! Of course!


    As for Jack’s bitchy little response:

    "Ferguson is obviously the typical academic "games are great" tool of the industry."

    Can you inform us a little more about his connection to the industry?

    "This is an industry that spends tens of millions of dollars on advertising to modify behavior, but then says that games can’t modify behavior."

    Advertising cannot modify behaviour. Can it influence decision making? Certainly, but only regarding the direction of decisions already made.

    Example: I am not hungry, I see an advert for a Burger King. Do i run out and buy a Whopper? No. Later that day, I AM hungry and have decided to get some food. I’m not sure what I am going to eat. I see an advert for Burger King. Mmm, that looks good! I’ll goand buy a Whopper.

    Ecample 2: I am at home and am reading a book. An advert comes on the tv for a new movie. Do i run straight to the cinema? No. LAter that week, I decide to go out an see a movie. I see an advert for the latest blockbuster and think that looks good. I go and see it

    "This over-educated idiot"

    Better than being undereducated, eh Jackie? You have first hand experience of this, being undereducated regarding Bar rules, ethics and even basic manners.

    "Ferguson, is in the teaching profession, of all things, but he claims that ideas have no consequences"

    Ideas can have no consequence. Imagine walking out in to the street and punching the first person you meet. Got that idea in your head? Good. Did you do it? No? Amazing! That idea had no consequence!

    "What a total, idiotic, tool of the video game industry."

    Again, what makes you think he is a tool of the industry? A tool is something that is used. Are you implying that this man is intentionally calling into dispute Craig Anderson’s flimsy findings on behalf of the video game industry? I would not be surprised, considering the big RICO conspiracy you came up with involving the Bar, GP, Rockstar, et al.

    "Jack Thompson"

    What’s that? No "attorney and you’re not?" tacked on the end?  Oh, right…

  19. 0
    Paul T. Farinelli says:

    This guy makes many reasonable, good points. Jack, you’d do well to shut up instead of pretending that calling him an idiot makes him wrong and you right. Oh, and I forget, exactly what job do you have, Jacky? Because last I checked it now involves sending angry, threatening, ultimately meaningless e-mails to people with much more important things to worry about than a self-important prick like you. Though, that was essentially you’re career a month ago, except at least then you could attach the phrase "Attorney and you’re not" to you’re many rantings here on Gamepolitics.

  20. 0
    Kincyr says:

    not to mention that the GTA titles that do make it to Japan do very poorly in sales, particulary because Japanese gamers show little-to-no interest.

    岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」

  21. 0
    Mattsworkname says:

    You know jack, it’s pretty freaking sad that you attack KNight when you are now a jobless failure who never one a single case against the industry, the same industry that just got your ass disbarred and I note, is still making money hand over fist despite your best efforts.

    Whose pathetic kiddies ? Oh thats right, it’s Jack. After all, lets look as just a few of his grand plans that failed.


    "Put rockstar out of bussines" Didn’t happen. THey are still making money and are set to make tons more.

    "Sue sony and microsoft for GTA and bully" FAILED.

    "Pass laws against games." DENIED!!

    You know what you are jack? A FAILURE!


    Yukimura is still here

    "Good,bad, I’m the guy with the GUN" Bruce cambell as ash, Army of darkness.

  22. 0
    magic_taco says:

    Yeah,im defintely getting educated about this article right now, This guy i hope blows a hole in Anderson’s study.


    Yay!, I missed you JT, if you are the real deal, since i’ve no beef against a stuck up moron like you, I cant wait for GP or Ezk to give the MIGHTY BAN HAMMER OF THOR! on you. :)

    And please, Shouldnt your manager be checking on be telling you to mop the restrooms, or did he fire you after you brought your laptop to work?


    "El Magnifo Taco"

  23. 0
    mdo7 says:


    One of the flaws that Mr. Anderson made was that in japan, video game do get censored and sometime banned.  The flawed psychologists forgot:

    Gears of war 2 (banned in Japan)

    Dead Space (banned in Japan)

    Resident Evil 4 (the chainsaw cutting the head, censored)

    Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune (blood removed, censored)

    Resistance: Fall of man (censored)

    I’m glad Ferguson was able to correct that.  But I think Ferguson could have use the Japanese censorship in Video game and the ban on Dead Space and Gears of war 2 to backup the flaw that Anderson made.

  24. 0
    unholyblackdeath says:

    Why would having a religious base make a dispute any more valid?  Lets put the Bible down and pick up the science book.  It is the year 2008 now.  The Bronze Age is quite over.

  25. 0
    sqlrob says:

    1) Again, Billions != right.  The burden of proof is on those that wish something other than the Null Hypothesis. Which means the burden lies on you, not him.

    2) If you argue for laws based on Leviticus, be even handed, no preference. No cherry picking.


  26. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    Read his argument, then read mine. He said that 1) Abortion was a discussion over whether or not a fetus is alive and 2) that english-speaking Christians have based their beliefs on lies because they did not speak the ancient language that the books of the Bible were written in, and he cited the example of Leviticus 18:22 in his argument.

    The discussion over abortion has nothing to do with the status of the fetus as alive, nor whether or not the fetus is human. The fetus is growing under its own power, thus it is alive. The fetus’s DNA reveals that the fetus is human, thus the life is human. Whether or not it is a person, whether or not it has the right to live, and whether or not the government has the right to restrict abortion is what the discussion is over. The facts that the fetus is alive and that the fetus is human are not disputable.

    His second point was that english-speaking and reading Christians have based their belief on an invalid Bible, and therefore, their beliefs are based on a lie, is where the discussion of Leviticus came up. He said, in effect, that the only way a person could truly know what Christian beliefs are is to base their beliefs on the original text of the Bible.

    Whether or not homosexuality is wrong is irrelevant to the conversation. Secondly, the book of Leviticus was given to the Levites as a group of rules for them to follow. Whether or not these rules are practical is of no concern to whether or not rule-abiding Levites followed them.

  27. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    1) No, it was not argumentum ad populum. I did not make the case that the sample size made my stance right. I DID make the case that saying that such an extensive belief system is completely invalid places the burden of proof more on him than me.

    2) Whether or not Jesus tossed out the old restrictions (for the most part, he didn’t, but that’s a different conversation) is irrelevant to the issue at hand. Notice my last paragraph. I was argueing against the notion that the whole thing is bunk based on translation errors, and was deconstructing the error he attempted to defend his position with.

    In short, you’ve missed the forest for the tree.

  28. 0
    Leet Gamer Jargon says:

    I’m not your buddy, friend!…..Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

    Also, I think that both the sperm and egg cells are alive even before they interact. Yet every time I…"chop some wood"…I end the hundreds of billions of potential lives that could grow up to be doctors, or military generals (or drug dealers; they never say that), or even game-hating attorneys. Does that make me a murderer?

    And by the way, Dark Sovereign, who gives a f&$k about Leviticus? A centuries old, supposed "true words of God" document stating that no man can lay with another man, which probably means the same thing about women. It is ancient, narrow-sighted, and obsolete. Yes, there are a few lessons taught that are followed (through ethics, not law) to this day, but not all of them. I may not be gay, but I know that everyone deserves the right to be happy.

    Game on, brothers and sisters.

  29. 0
    Loudspeaker says:


    It’s the "adult" equivolent of playing cops and robbers with finger guns.

    "Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

  30. 0
    sqlrob says:

    Argumentum ad populum. Invalid. Just because a belief is held by many doesn’t mean it’s either right or worth respect.

    IIRC, Jesus also tossed out the old restrictions, so please quote something other than Leviticus. Have you been shaving?




  31. 0
    Sporge says:

    Firstly many say that it is a question of when life begins and that is wrong, anything that can still grow is still alive in some respect.  The question is when HUMAN life begins.  That is much harder to determine.  To say that abortion is wrong from the start though is to say that condems are wrong and for that matter not having sex is wrong because it prevents sperm from entering the egg and developing.  Honestly that is ridiculous.  Honestly I do not think abortion is wrong if it is done early, it could have been an accident, or caused by one of manyrape cases that go unreported due to fear.  I do not define human life as something with human genes, I define human life as consciousness, and an egg and sperm are not conscious the moment they meet.  I also feel that when a body becomes conscious that is when a soul is present.

    Second, you are being a bible literalist.  I cannot present proof against what they meant any more than you can present proof for it.  This section of the bible was talking about populating their new promised land, of course have sex with a guy would seem a waste in that respect, because 2 guys cannot have a baby.  They had a story about how sinful a guy was for pulling out during sex so not to have a baby.  We are far beyond the need to populate the planet, we need population control now.  Why do people have problems with gay people anyway?  They aren’t trying to make you gay why try to make them straight?  If it is a choice to be gay why would you be gay and lose the chance at having kids of your own?  Why do so many teenagers kill themselves for being gay if it is just a choice?  Did you make a conscious decision to like girls, or have the ability to be atracted to anyone if you will it enough?  Of course you can’t.  If you could there would be no such thing as ugly.



  32. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    I don’t question that translation allows for errors to slip through. The error he mentioned, however, isn’t something that could slip through without purpose or a serious blunder.

  33. 0
    Wolvenmoon says:

    Yay bible fight.

    The fact is, translation allows flaws to be introduced (even if you believe the bible to be perfect). To minimize the impact you should be reading a study bible with three or four different translations, and when something doesn’t make sense get a rough translation of the chapter.

    To the other commentors:

    Quite frankly, there are a NUMBER of groups claiming to be christian and claiming to act from the bible that aren’t. They’re making stuff up. Jack Thompson, for instance, flat out insults people that disagree with him. That isn’t very Christ like, he isn’t following Christ’s example, he isn’t acting as a Christian (Literally:"Follower of Christ").

    One of the HUGE problems with abortion is that it is almost always used after adultery. The absolute minority of cases in 1/100th a percent occur after rape. The other excuses such as "it would hurt the mother" are bullcrap, at least in america. Our medical system is equipped and REQUIRED EVEN IF YOU CAN’T PAY to provide life saving care.

    "It would damage the mother’s health!" Then why is she having sex and taking that risk? "But it was rape!" Falls into a tiny tiny tiny minority.

    "The baby’s disabled anyway." You really want to get into eugenics? Last time that happened we had some dumbass raise enough of a force to nearly conquer all of europe.

    Regardless, it’s a silly argument as long as men aren’t held accountable for impregnating a woman-unless they’re married then divorce. They should have to pay, right off the top of their paycheck, child support that went into the form of foodstamps, medical credits, etc so that the mother couldn’t abuse it. And once the mother remarried or no longer needed it, then the man could possibly be off the hook.

    Watch, if you introduce that into a male dominated government, it’ll be rejected entirely.

  34. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    No, there isn’t any wiggle room. The exact point at which a sperm and egg cell merges is irrelevant to knowing that the resulting zygote is alive, or to know that both the egg and sperm were alive. Life comes from life. Even accepting that this wiggle room exists, it wouldn’t be more than a couple of weeks before you could officially say that you were killing a zygote. So your  premise is bunk.

    You’ve asserted that the beliefs of one billion people are completely invalid. I don’t need to explain myself. You do. The original language (Aramaic, I belive) is far simpler than any language today. The assertion that any translation other than King James is invalid is laughable too. Old English can be translated to modern English fairly easily, and complete misunderstandings would have to be purposeful.

    Just for giggles, here is the pertinent section, Leviticus, chapter 18: Unlawful Sexual Relations:

    Leviticus 18

    Unlawful Sexual Relations

     1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘I am the LORD your God. 3 You must not do as they do in Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow their practices. 4 You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. 5 Keep my decrees and laws, for the man who obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD.

     6 " ‘No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.

     7 " ‘Do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; do not have relations with her.

     8 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; that would dishonor your father.

     9 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere.

     10 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter; that would dishonor you.

     11 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father’s wife, born to your father; she is your sister.

     12 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s sister; she is your father’s close relative.

     13 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with your mother’s sister, because she is your mother’s close relative.

     14 " ‘Do not dishonor your father’s brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations; she is your aunt.

     15 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son’s wife; do not have relations with her.

     16 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with your brother’s wife; that would dishonor your brother.

     17 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness.

     18 " ‘Do not take your wife’s sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.

     19 " ‘Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period.

     20 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with your neighbor’s wife and defile yourself with her.

     21 " ‘Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed [a] to Molech, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD. 

     22 " ‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

     23 " ‘Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion.

     24 " ‘Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled. 25 Even the land was defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. 26 But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the aliens living among you must not do any of these detestable things, 27 for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled. 28 And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you.

     29 " ‘Everyone who does any of these detestable things—such persons must be cut off from their people. 30 Keep my requirements and do not follow any of the detestable customs that were practiced before you came and do not defile yourselves with them. I am the LORD your God.’ "

    This is from NIV, btw. Notice 22: "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." Provide proof that this was supposed to be a condemnation of prostitution. Then explain why those who slept with prostitutes in the Old Testatment were not considered wicked men for doing so.

  35. 0
    sqlrob says:

    A sperm is alive. An egg is alive. Therefore the embryo is alive. There’s an unending chain of life back until the first organism.

    The problem isn’t that it’s alive, the problem is determining when it’s a person.



  36. 0
    DeepThorn says:

    at what point in time is the fetus alive, if it right when the sperm hits the egg, when it developes a heart, and so on.  There is a good amount of wiggle room buddy.  How many weeks, it is a finite time in all cases, what about complications, and so on.

    If you research it, then you would learn a good amount buddy.  The original text is far different from the english translations, especially if you go by any english book other than King James.  The New Living translation is absolute bullswap, and has no research behind it that qualifies it as a reputable translation where it differs or gets more specific than King James.


  37. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    Your kidding me, right? 

    Abortion: no, there is no dispute that the fetus is alive. None. Zilch. Basic biology would tell you that.  

    The Bible: Proof? Your post reminds me of the ridiculous assertion by Muslims that the only way to understand the Koran is to read it in Arabic. It also wouldn’t make any sense, since "men of God" slept with prostitutes without any mention of God being pissed at them, which would have to be intentionally skipped over to be missed, especially in the Old Testament, no matter the original language.

    In short, your post is rife with ignorance and dubious assertions.

  38. 0
    tollwutig says:

    You forget, there is the oft overlooked mod who is happily employed.  Unfortunately that job takes away from mod timing but I can still delete you if you step over the line.  So watch it.  -Toll

  39. 0
    Leet Gamer Jargon says:

    Hey, EZK! Does your wife really work for Mary Kay? ‘Cause if she does, I’d like to talk with her: I really need something to get rid of these bags under my eyes!

    Game on, brothers and sisters.

  40. 0
    ezbiker555 says:

    that you can kiss my ass and fuck off.


    And if your not down with that than D generation X has two words for ya

    SUCK IT!!!!!!!!

  41. 0
    hellfire7885 says:

    Actually, considering how many of your comments made it through, andu nless I’m wrogn as I remember he may have mentioned, Mr Knight actually does has a job away from the site. Wait, forgot, because he defends video games you assume he has no job.

    As for the jab about his wife, I almost did forget that you have a problem with women being allowed to have careers outside the home apparently, as your actions proved with your attitude to those testifyign at your DIBARMENT trial.


    And at least Mr Knight doesn’t have that hanging over his head, Mr Disbarred.


    Now why not quit before you land yourself a job stamping liscense plates?

  42. 0
    Attack_Gypsy says:

    Who cares?

    I have friends whose wives have careers, and they take care of the kids and such. Is there something wrong with this?

    Oh, wait, snap, that’s you. Right, you got disbarred, so you don’t have a job anymore…



    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. ~ Benjamin Franklin

  43. 0
    Hackangel says:

    You mean like you yourself have no job? Thing is, Mr. Knight does come out as a mature being while you yourself do not. Wild ravings of a jobless man on an internet forum. Keep it at home Mr. THompson, because once you cross over to yelling at clouds it’s off to the nuthouse with you. Not that this was not suggested to you many times before.

  44. 0
    Trevor McGee says:

    This coming from the guy who’s wife is the one who has to bust her ass to keep your family afloat because you can’t stop being a lying dick and got yourself disbarred.

  45. 0
    mccainisthefreakingman says:

    I want you all to understand that the moderator of this site, Mr. Knight, apparently has no job, and his wife is a Mary Kay cosmetics operative so he can perform this priceless function here. 

  46. 0
    NovaBlack says:

    he phoned you? what the heck does he say??

    dude im sorry your getting harassed like that its totally not on.

    If it continues cant you complain to somebody about that?

  47. 0
    DavCube says:

    You’re saying that like it’s something he HASN’T done for the past… what, half-decade now?

    The man once said here that everyone who posts here should be legally executed. The man lost his sanity years ago. God knows who’s been holding his leash, preventing him from snapping any further.

  48. 0
    Shadow D. Darkman says:

    Dude, I fucking sympathize with you. Having to put up with him all the time. No one deserves that, not even you. *nods to the First Comment B.S.*


    "Game on, brothers and sisters." -Leet Gamer Jargon

  49. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    It’s the real deal. He has been attacking me in that fashion since the countdown timer. He has contacted me through email, phone and Facebook as well as here. All with the same childish antics.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
    Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091

    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  50. 0
    mogbert says:

    You sure he’s not fake? He seems REALLY immature. Like way worse then before. If that’s the real JT then he needs to seek help fast.

    Other then that I would just assume he was a -chan troll that was bored. The remarks being made are so over the top and stupid that I wouldn’t expect even JT would make them.

    I wouldn’t expect him to crack so quickly.  If it is the real JT, then he has lost what little was left to him, he has BECOME a -chan troll.

  51. 0
    Leet Gamer Jargon says:

    Excellent reply. You took your opponent’s claim, used factual evidence, and presented an intelligent argument which sold your point very effectively. Bravo, oh foamy one.

    Game on, brothers and sisters.

  52. 0
    Leet Gamer Jargon says:

    Ferguson is obviously the typical academic "games are great" tool of the industry.

    No, he doesn’t. He seems like an intelligent and well-educated individual…unlike you.

    This over-educated idiot

    One can never be "over-educated". Also, an over-educated idiot is an oxymoron.

    …his profession is useless.

    No, Mr. Thompson, a profession in the field of education is never EVER useless. However, there is no place in society for a disbarred medical malpractice attorney.

    What a total, idiotic, tool of the video game industry.  Other than that, he’s a very cool dude.

    Are you friggin’ kidding me? How can you utterly debase someone like that, then turn around and call them a "very cool dude", you dried-up dog turd? By the way, a man your age should never use the words "cool" or "dude": its very unbecoming and quite…lame, if I may. Have a nice day, Mr. Thompson!

    Game on, brothers and sisters.

  53. 0
    Wolvenmoon says:

    Damnit, would you stop your backwards advertising? You’re in the pocket of take 2 and the game industry to raise as much awareness of a product as possible.

    Jack Thompson’s PR! Or:How to make people hate you, and through attaching a negative image to a product advertise for its competitors!

    Step 1:Use pseudo-intelligent high handed out-your-nose language to make idiot newspeople and soccor moms nod their heads and say ‘uh huh’

    Step 2:As gamers say it, gain aggro. Piss everyone off. Say outrageous things. Create such a negative image for yourself that people are willing to pay money to do the opposite of what you say.

    Step 3:Reap the benefits of employing reverse psychology so successfully.


    You’re scum. I’ve met-during my volunteering my time to help people with disabilities-all sorts of nasty people ranging from druggies to manipulative pricks, both with more backbone and believability than you.

    Why don’t you do some good for christians, mccain, and the anti-video game movement and convert to buddhism, scream your support for obama, and jump off a building clutching a copy of the latest spider man game?

  54. 0
    DeepThorn says:

    Do you understand that many people use video games to vent this frustration and anger, and levels of violent crime has went down since the release of the first GTA.  Is there a correlation?  Most likely no, but it pretty well shows that it isn’t increasing violence to the degree you are thinking it does buddy.

    The cause of voilence in video games and cause of global warming are the EXACT same arguement.  It figures in one thing, not looking at history enough, not looking at other factors AT ALL, and not using common logic.  What caused large tempurature change in the past?  The sun, scientist have proven that more solar spots means the sun is burning hotter, and with less it is burning cooler, which burning cooler caused the low temperatures of his time.   Right now there are a crap ton of solar spots, and our planet is getting much hotter.  (btw solar spots are caused by solar flares which are caused by a hot burning sun)  This was also proven by satalites going outside of our solar system as well.  The shockbow changes size based off of the amount of solar energy produced by the sun.  (Damn the sun is powerful, but we already know that.)

    There are leading scientist, and people like me, that will blow smoke up your ass about global warming though just to make you be more smart about your spending and invest in green technology because of how much money you will save in the long run.

    The same thing is happening with game violence.  Games don’t actually cause violence, but these guys think it is moral moral or correct for people to not let their kids play violent video games, some nut jobs think they shouldnt even exist for adults, and so that is why this type of research goes the way it does.  Plus, our government funds them, so if you are going to be paid a great salary, then why not throw BS in their face if they will buy it.

    This is the core problem with our academic institutions right now though.  We are given people a crap ton of money, and they are giving back bullcrap.

  55. 0
    Rabidkeebler says:


    Sorry to burst your bubble jack, but he is right on this.  The study done was flawed (horrendously so).  The study basically says that a 2% difference is enough to base aggressive children from non aggressive children.  Ferguson is not saying that there isn’t a connection, but to prove a true connection, you have to make it independent of outside factors.  It is the equivalent of testing to see if carbon emissions can cause lung cancer, and not checking to see if anyone in your group smokes.  Obviously that smoking is going to scew the results towards cancer, and still leave the question as to whether carbon emissions can cause cancer since.


    Second, in terms of the research, due to the second sample size (over 1000) it is almost guaranteeing that even a small change would be enough to register a significant difference at any level.  Due to the second study, I have to wonder what the results would be if it was removed and reworked only using the first and last study.  I think that the authors of the study in Japan artificially inflated their sample size to guarantee positive results.  Second, the authors also cite the fact that they are using non parametric data, which gives less precise results.  This is partially forgivable since, due to what they are measuring, it is difficult to give it a true numerical value, but when this is combined with the sample size of the second group, it further muddles the information being given.


    They also ignore (blatantly) that there is conflicting research as to the connection.  In terms of statistics, this means that the research is already biased.  In statistics, the best thing to do is create a null-hypothesis (two-tailed), or a hypothesis that states that there is no difference in violence between kids who play violent video games, and those that don’t.  By doing this, you are free to examine all aspects of the numbers, since you are not expecting any form of result, and thus any result received is okay.  But instead by looking for a connection, the researchers are stating that there has to be a value, and they are just looking to see how big it is (this is called a one-tailed test). 


    For a true study on this topic to occur, these problems need to be addressed.

    1st) An appropriate size of children need to be taken (approx 100-200). 

    2nd) Accountability needs to be taken in terms of life (being bullied, drugs, family life, social life, etc) to guarantee that results aren’t being scewed one way or another based on external factors

    3rd) A true measurement of behavior needs to occur (physical violence, why, how often, etc.) this needs to be noted to allow for other extenuating circumstances (if a child is being bullied, then would they count that as violence?)

    4th) Acknowledgement needs to occur for all studies.  This paper only cites papers that already agree with its findings, and not conflicting reports.  Not to mention, reports have been written against the measurement form that it used (see articles below for further review of Buss-Perry Aggression)

    The Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire:

    Some unfinished business q

    Gilbert Becker

    Department of Psychology, University of Winnipeg, 515 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Man., Canada R3B 2E9


    Refining the Architecture of Aggression: A Measurement Model

    for the Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire

    Fred B. Bryant and Bruce D. Smith

    Loyola University Chicago


    Foaming at the mouth

  56. 0
    NovaBlack says:

    ”This is an industry that spends tens of millions of dollars on advertising to modify behavior, but then says that games can’t modify behavior. ”


    err… what?


    Advertising modifies behaviour..

    therefore games modify behaviour?

    Even though they are completely different things?

    So using the same logic, because I like to eat carrots, i like to eat planks of wood? I mean.. separate things but thats how your logic works. Great plan. 


    So how effective is the advertising at McDonalds McDisbarredGuy?

    You got past junior training week yet? I hear you learn how to make a shake in week 2.  

  57. 0
    Andrew Eisen says:

    Advertisements don’t modify your behavior.  They give you information so that you can make an informed decision.  What you do with that information is your choice.  Advertisements and games can attempt to influence your behavior but they cannot force you to act a certain way. 

    Where exactly does Ferguson claim that ideas have no consequences?


    Andrew Eisen

  58. 0
    mccainisthefreakingman says:

    Ferguson is obviously the typical academic "games are great" tool of the industry.  This is an industry that spends tens of millions of dollars on advertising to modify behavior, but then says that games can’t modify behavior.

    This over-educated idiot, Ferguson, is in the teaching profession, of all things, but he claims that ideas have no consequences!  Good, so he can leave academia and live in an Internet cafe, since his profession is useless.  What a total, idiotic, tool of the video game industry.  Other than that, he’s a very cool dude.  Jack Thompson

     You’re back again?  Geez well I’ll flag this for GP review of ye old IP address.  – Toll

  59. 0
    NovaBlack says:

    yeah i dont get why nobody picks up on that.. its saying the following..


    In test scenario 1) A corellates to B

    In test scenario 2) A does not corellate to B

    therfore A causes B.


    what .. it makes no sense.


    Oh and GET THIS!!

    DisbarredGuys response was that the difference was because ‘Japan has less guns you idiot’.

    So he actually ADMITS that he thinks GUNS NOT VIDEOGAMES cause the violence increase. I mean if the change in outcome is down to that, then guns cause the change, videogames dont affect it. Nice work arguing yourself DisbarredGuy.




  60. 0
    Flamespeak says:

    I wonder why he didn’t comment on the blaringly obvious flaw. Follow the logic, folks.

    1. Video games cause harmful effects and violent behavior in youths in America, hence a rise in violent behavior in America’s youth.

    2. Video games cause harmful effects and violent behavior in youths in Japan, hence NO rise in violent behavior in Japan’s youth.

    The results are completely different, so the study proves that video games do not cause violent behavior in youths.


  61. 0
    DeepThorn says:

    This is a study that is controversial because of people being complete dumbasses though, so it is worse.  At least abortion has a religious based dispute and the time something is considered alive is quiet difficult to measure.  (I say when higher brain function occurs such as purposeful movement due to stimuli or some reaction to pain.)

    Then we have the debate of God existing or not, which is still decently worth while, but too many people think the english bible is a valid bible, but if they would know the language their bible was translated from, they would realize half of it is BS because it was mistranslated.  (Saying same sex marriage is against God’s will is incorrect in the new and old testimate are both wrong, it was prositution (maybe rape) and unfaithfulness respectively. [raw hebrew translation shows a more logical connection to that, and linguist who researched it says that is the best they can do, but garentee it says nothing about same sex relations.])

    There are things worth and not worth debating though.  Many things have already been found as true or false, while others are only in the point of view of the individual (abortion) or impossible to know (God).

  62. 0
    HilaryDuffGta says:

    http://www.myspace.com/hermoinefan_420 (and boom goes the dynamite)



    wow i was way off…yea i would attempt to read this so called "study" but i’m sure its full of crap and bs and not worth my time to read…well on the plus side it looks like we are going back to the gp days of old..awwwww memories!! lol..hope everyone is chill

  63. 0
    mogbert says:

    Um… OW, burn!

    Pretty much, he is just saying the same thing that most commenters were saying in reply to that last article.

    Social researchers tend to guide their studies in order to find what they suspect, rather then like physical scientists that often find what they don’t expect and have to figure out why.

    Might as well add in my 2 pennies on this. I think they have it backwards, and a simple study could show this. Take a group of kids and run them through a psych eval, sorting them into the so-called aggressive and non-aggressive stereotypes. Then sit them in a room with two games, say Tetris (or Bejeweled) and Mortal Kombat (or insert your violent videogame of choice). Common sense would indicate that the more aggressive children would choose the more violent video games while the less aggressive would choose the less aggressive games. Granted, there will likely be bleed over, especially if both games rock. But my hypothesis would be that violent games and aggressive children may go together because the child chooses the game, not because the game molds the child.

    With the kind of study they did, you could see how kids react differently from listening to Ride of the Valkeries vs Dance of the Sugarplum Faries. No one is saying that games have no effect, what we are saying is that games have a minimal, temporary effect, which is greatly outweighed by the positive benefits. Just like listening to that crazy violent music, like the 1812 Overture wich is often performed with violent weapons!

  64. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Hmm, a poorly done study claiming video games cause violence in children?  Didn’t see that coming.

    I hadn’t even looked at the research, but I had a feeling they didnt control for things like family violence history, genetic influences, or any of the other things that could have an affect on the psyche of a child or adolescent.

Leave a Reply