-
Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Blacks more likely to have force used against them, but no more likely to have deadly force use against them than anyone else.
http://www.economist.com/news/united...ng-black-lives
Quote:
Mr Fryer dug deeper into the data. He combed through 6,000 incident reports from Houston, including all the shootings, incidents involving Tasers and a sample in which lethal force could have justifiably been used but was not. What he found was even more startling: black suspects appear less likely to be shot than non-black ones, fatally or otherwise.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
boutons_deux
Debunked
Link?
I'd love to read some mid-20's poly-sci/journalism major on Salon debunk the work of a McArthur genius economist from Harvard
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
spurraider21
Link?
I'd love to read some mid-20's poly-sci/journalism major on Salon debunk the work of a McArthur genius economist from Harvard
triggered
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
boutons_deux
How dare you forget Salon
"If Freyer’s conclusions are correct, then while police may be less willing to use lethal force against a black person in a given encounter, there are so many encounters because of racial profiling or other causes (:lol) that the country’s police are still killing black people at much higher rates than whites.
These disparities in use of force can not be explained away by the argument that blacks disproportionately live in high crime areas or supposedly (:lol) commit crimes at a higher rate than whites, thus the likelihood of negative police encounters are substantially increased.
http://www.salon.com/2016/07/14/sorry_conservatives_new_research_from_harvard_show s_a_profound_amount_of_racism_by_policenot_less_of _it/
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
boutons_deux
That's great. Except none of those "debunk" it.
The snopes piece doesn't offer a conclusion at all and mainly summarizes a Washington post editorial and the Vox piece you copy pasted.
The Vox piece had a lot of superficial complaints. They criticize Fryers work because fryer supposedly claimed that he was the first person to research or study the issue. I don't think fryer ever made that claim outright. Vox also complained that fryer used police reports as his data source. But they didn't actually debunk or disprove any of his findings. Vox also pointed out that Fryer didn't investigate the causes of stops, though I'm pretty sure Fryers piece outright notes that flaw in his paper.
And the mediamatters piece mainly discusses the scope and sample size of the data... Which again Fryer already acknowledged as a flaw in his work.
Nothing he said has been "debunked" but no, it's not a complete comprehensive study of every police shooting in the country. It never claimed to be.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
You guys sent boutard to his safe space
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
:lol vox
:lol mediamatters
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
How many reports of white adults and kids being shot on sight?
How many 100Ks of whites are stopped and frisked?
Blacks like this guy Fryer, Clarence Thomas, Milwaukee police chief, are blacks worst "advocates".
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
boutons_deux
How many reports of white adults and kids being shot on sight?
How many 100Ks of whites are stopped and frisked?
Blacks like this guy Fryer, Clarence Thomas, Milwaukee police chief, are blacks worst "advocates".
Fryer looked at data and reported it. If you read his background (I'll link you his wiki summary), and still decide he's a horrible black advocate, then I pity you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_G._Fryer,_Jr.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Video: Austin police body-slam black teacher, tell her blacks have ‘violent tendencies’
Officials in Austin are investigating the violent arrest of a black elementary school teacher who was body-slammed by a white police officer during a traffic stop.
The investigation comes after the emergence of police video footage showing not only the June 2015 arrest but also a scene afterward, when another white officer told the teacher that cops are wary of blacks because of their “violent tendencies” and “intimidating” appearance.
“Ninety-nine percent of the time … it is the black community that is being violent,” the officer tells her. “That’s why a lot of white people are afraid. And I don’t blame them.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...t-draw7&wpmm=1
What's the problem, nationally, this happens to white female teachers much more often.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Its not a study. it was not published in a peer review publication and its not even finished. correct term is working paper.
author is an economist with no criminology experience
small sample size without control or normalization; its handpicked counties in 4 states; basically places that were willing to cooperate
it relies on police reports which are notoriously unreliable due to self reporting issues and biasing
police unions fight a compulsory national database
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
spurraider21
That's great. Except none of those "debunk" it.
The snopes piece doesn't offer a conclusion at all and mainly summarizes a Washington post editorial and the Vox piece you copy pasted.
The Vox piece had a lot of superficial complaints. They criticize Fryers work because fryer supposedly claimed that he was the first person to research or study the issue. I don't think fryer ever made that claim outright. Vox also complained that fryer used police reports as his data source. But they didn't actually debunk or disprove any of his findings. Vox also pointed out that Fryer didn't investigate the causes of stops, though I'm pretty sure Fryers piece outright notes that flaw in his paper.
And the mediamatters piece mainly discusses the scope and sample size of the data... Which again Fryer already acknowledged as a flaw in his work.
Nothing he said has been "debunked" but no, it's not a complete comprehensive study of every police shooting in the country. It never claimed to be.
No then what is "A 'Harvard Study' Doesn't Disprove Racial Bias in Officer-Involved Shootings" doing in the title, jackass?
The vox piece complains about the veracity of the paper and data. Hardly superficial. Nice handwave though.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
No then what is "A 'Harvard Study' Doesn't Disprove Racial Bias in Officer-Involved Shootings" doing in the title, jackass?
The vox piece complains about the veracity of the paper and data. Hardly superficial. Nice handwave though.
No problem
Produce a peer reviewed study that refutes it.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CosmicCowboy
No problem
Produce a peer reviewed study that refutes it.
In this case you guys are the one with the burden of proof.
There is no reliable data. The FBI director has been complaining about it for years.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
In this case you guys are the one with the burden of proof.
There is no reliable data. The FBI director has been complaining about it for years.
So you say it is the only attempt so far to sort the data and try to find a correlation between color and police shootings?
Bu since the results don't match your preconceptions it can't possibly be accurate?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
boutons_deux
How many reports of white adults and kids being shot on sight?
How many 100Ks of whites are stopped and frisked?
Blacks like this guy Fryer, Clarence Thomas, Milwaukee police chief, are blacks worst "advocates".
That Milwaukee police chief is like Samuel Jackson's character in Django tbh ...
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
No then what is "A 'Harvard Study' Doesn't Disprove Racial Bias in Officer-Involved Shootings" doing in the title, jackass?
The vox piece complains about the veracity of the paper and data. Hardly superficial. Nice handwave though.
I never said vox only had superficial arguments. The one about him supposedly (he didn't) claiming he's the only one to who have ever studied the data was certainly superficial and was among their key criticisms.
The snopes title was in reference to the fact that it wasn't a vetted study, as the deck of the article indicates. The snopes piece didn't actually refute the data
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
the "data" is just Houston, and only the data reported by racist, near-Deep-South Houston cops. reliable?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
spurraider21
I never said vox only had superficial arguments. The one about him supposedly (he didn't) claiming he's the only one to who have ever studied the data was certainly superficial and was among their key criticisms.
The snopes title was in reference to the fact that it wasn't a vetted study, as the deck of the article indicates. The snopes piece didn't actually refute the data
Meant WaPo not Vox.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CosmicCowboy
So you say it is the only attempt so far to sort the data and try to find a correlation between color and police shootings?
Bu since the results don't match your preconceptions it can't possibly be accurate?
That's not what I said. I laid out my reasons in the post above the one I quoted. Shall I quote it to help you?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
There is no reliable data.
Bullshit. Shaun King has the data.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
boutons_deux
the "data" is just Houston, and only the data reported by racist, near-Deep-South Houston cops. reliable?
Share some data, your last three link dumps contained zero.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
boutons_deux
the "data" is just Houston, and only the data reported by racist, near-Deep-South Houston cops. reliable?
So all 5318 officers (2012 number) in the Houston PD are racists. Nice conspiracy theory, retard.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
z0sa
While that is obviously true Texas is notorious for systemic racism particularly East Texas.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
z0sa
You rightwingnuts KNOW all Muslims are radicals terrorists
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
boutons_deux
You rightwingnuts KNOW all Muslims are radicals terrorists
I'm a "rightwingnut" too.
Nice trolling.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
Its not a study. it was not published in a peer review publication and its not even finished. correct term is working paper.
author is an economist with no criminology experience
small sample size without control or normalization; its handpicked counties in 4 states; basically places that were willing to cooperate
it relies on police reports which are notoriously unreliable due to self reporting issues and biasing
police unions fight a compulsory national database
If only he was as credible as Fraud King.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
A huge problem with the study noted in the article:
If we take just the incidents in which police actually made a decision to engage a person or persons then skin color is important. It could be that engaging a white person was done because there was something very obviously wrong in the first place that caused the officer to engage. It could be that the very slightest suspicion caused an officer to stop or engage a black person. So basically the data is already skewed.
Note to fuzzy and others:
The fact that some on this board took the time to read and critize this particular ongoing study shows a bias. Would we be as critical if the study clearly confirmed my belief that blacks do get treated unfairly by cops?
I doubt it.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Welcome to the echo chamber.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
A huge problem with the study noted in the article:
If we take just the incidents in which police actually made a decision to engage a person or persons then skin color is important. It could be that engaging a white person was done because there was something very obviously wrong in the first place that caused the officer to engage. It could be that the very slightest suspicion caused an officer to stop or engage a black person. So basically the data is already skewed.
Note to fuzzy and others:
The fact that some on this board took the time to read and critize this particular ongoing study shows a bias. Would we be as critical if the study clearly confirmed my belief that blacks do get treated unfairly by cops?
I doubt it.
yep, Fryer's original article clearly noted that he didn't account for the purpose behind the stops, but merely the ensuing treatment from officers AFTER stops. all these criticisms were already acknowledged
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
is this just from Houston? because this study doesnt mean much if it's not externally valid imo
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
A huge problem with the study noted in the article:
If we take just the incidents in which police actually made a decision to engage a person or persons then skin color is important. It could be that engaging a white person was done because there was something very obviously wrong in the first place that caused the officer to engage. It could be that the very slightest suspicion caused an officer to stop or engage a black person. So basically the data is already skewed.
Note to fuzzy and others:
The fact that some on this board took the time to read and critize this particular ongoing study shows a bias. Would we be as critical if the study clearly confirmed my belief that blacks do get treated unfairly by cops?
I doubt it.
Fuck off. A bias towards what? An informed opinion?
If the study had a localized, small sample size, had a biased data source, and claimed to be a peer reviewed when in fact it was published in Ebony then you would get pushback. Your fantasy that there are not people avid on the other side is nonsense.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
Fuck off. A bias towards what? An informed opinion?
If the study had a localized, small sample size, had a biased data source, and claimed to be a peer reviewed when in fact it was published in Ebony then you would get pushback. Your fantasy that there are not people avid on the other side is nonsense.
You're the one who spent months spamming Fraud King's lies uncritically because they supported your narrative.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
spurraider21
yep, Fryer's original article clearly noted that he didn't account for the purpose behind the stops, but merely the ensuing treatment from officers AFTER stops. all these criticisms were already acknowledged
Yep that's why I said noted in the article.
I think it's very important.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
Fuck off. A bias towards what? An informed opinion?
If the study had a localized, small sample size, had a biased data source, and claimed to be a peer reviewed when in fact it was published in Ebony then you would get pushback. Your fantasy that there are not people avid on the other side is nonsense.
Biased in what you choose to look closely at you Fckn dimwitted twerp.
Its bigger than just this study.
Everyone does it. Don't try so hard to be special son.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
Biased in what you choose to look closely at you Fckn dimwitted twerp.
Its bigger than just this study.
Everyone does it. Don't try so hard to be special son.
Are you really going to play coy to the connotation of political bias on a political forum, dimwit? As I said, fuck off.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clipper Nation
You're the one who spent months spamming Fraud King's lies uncritically because they supported your narrative.
This is stupid. I posted one tweet where he had a picture of Brown's corpse and the position of the police truck. Since then your dumbass has been trying to pin that on me.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
Are you really going to play coy to the connotation of political bias on a political forum, dimwit? As I said, fuck off.
Wtf are you babbling about?
Playing coy... Sure thing.
Why don't you sit and think about it a bit longer. You may surprise yourself no you won't..
And stop with the parrot response.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
Wtf are you babbling about?
Playing coy... Sure thing.
Why don't you sit and think about it a bit longer. You may surprise yourself no you won't..
And stop with the parrot response.
What do you think I meant when I said
Quote:
A bias towards what? An informed opinion?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hemann82
Lmao spurs talk comments on academic research
It was never published in an academic journal. Peer review was never in play. His expertise is also in economics not criminology.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
It was never published in an academic journal. Peer review was never in play. His expertise is also in economics not criminology.
is your expertise in quantum mechanics?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
It was never published in an academic journal. Peer review was never in play. His expertise is also in economics not criminology.
indeed, then it is not particularly interesting findings until there are enough peer reviewed studies in journals for a meta-analysis, tbh
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
It disproves Occam's Razor apparently
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
spurraider21
is your expertise in quantum mechanics?
do I need to be to say that it is more complex than newtonian mechanics?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hemann82
Like I said lmao
It's not academic research so its not like what you said.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
It was never published in an academic journal. Peer review was never in play. His expertise is also in economics not criminology.
Lol
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Well no one is talking about the paper so that works for me.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
What do you think I meant when I said
You are so full of yourself having the ability to detect coy would not be possible.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
do I need to be to say that it is more complex than newtonian mechanics?
Damn you are a twit...
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
:cry
Quantum mechanics being more complex than newtonian mechanics belies occam's razor else Newtonian mechanics could explain quantum behavior which they cannot. It is what it is. In the context of said discussion the explanation I had given was simpler than the formal definition. The butthurt is crossthread.
I do like now that you guys have given up on trying to prove me wrong and have now gone back to ignorance as virtue. Ridiculing someone for trying to 'talk smart' as if the alternative is preferred is absolutely delicious.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
You are so full of yourself having the ability to detect coy would not be possible.
Well maybe you're not coy maybe your just too stupid to figure it out. I was being generous I guess. I'll help.
When you bring up bias on a political forum, it implies a political bias which essentially denotes confirmation bias and unreliability. It's why I stay away from pundits and try to get my news from objective journals like CSM and politico for example.
I asked if you meant a bias towards an informed opinion because you tried to conflate interest with bias. That is WC level thinking frankly.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
And Crayola further demonstrates his ability. He's reduced to cartoons and memes like engineer Darrin who is ignorant of signal theory and integrating systems so posts memes instead too.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Where'd you get you Ph.D in quantum physics from?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
:rollin I can do it better!
Ahh I get it: youre asshurt that I brought up the subject at all. I never claimed to have one but you know that. It must burn that you had to give up on trying to win a point when all I had to do was quote the same refutation and you couldn't come up with shit, Crayola. You've been trying to get at me for what 2 days now with these pitiful attempts since that?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Why would I be asshurt about you bringing up quantum physics?
Where'd you get your quantum physics Ph.D from?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
Why would I be asshurt about you bringing up quantum physics?
Where'd you get your quantum physics Ph.D from?
I really couldn't say for certain but you keep carping about it with snark such as this so it is what it is. I do have some theories about it if you'd like to hear them. Occam's razor is demonstrably not a proof as evidenced by QM. In response I've gotten this petulance for two days now.
Why would I need s Ph. D. to comment on it or more specifically, crayola, why would I need one to argue or otherwise comment on it with a shitty lawyer?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
I really couldn't say but you keep carping for certain about it with snark such as this so it is what it is. I do have some theories about it if you'd like to hear them. Occam's razor is demonstrably not a proof as evidenced by QM. In response I've gotten this petulance for two days now.
Why would I need s Ph. D. to comment on it or more specifically crayon why would I need one to argue or otherwise comment on it with a shitty lawyer?
Oh, so you don't have a doctorate in quantum physics. I guess that's not important if you have some other basis for having expertise in quantum physics (lol). Where'd you get your expertise from?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
Oh, so you don't have a doctorate in quantum physics. I guess that's not important if you have some other basis for having expertise in quantum physics (lol). Where'd you get your expertise from?
SO now you backtrack once again. I'll just use the same argument again.
Why would I need an expertise to comment on it or more specifically, crayola, why would I need one to argue or otherwise comment on it with a shitty lawyer?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
SO now you backtrack once again. I'll just use the same argument again.
Why would I need an expertise to comment on it or more specifically, crayola, why would I need one to argue or otherwise comment on it with a shitty lawyer?
Are you asking me why you would need expertise in quantum physics to comment on quantum physics? Is that honestly your question?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
It was never published in an academic journal. Peer review was never in play. His expertise is also in economics not criminology.
If you don't need expertise in quantum physics, why does Fryer need expertise in criminology?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
Are you asking me why you would need expertise in quantum physics to comment on quantum physics? Is that honestly your question?
nope I'm asking why would I need it to discuss it with a shitty lawyer. The prepositional phrase is key, Crayola. You need help figuring out who the lawyer is?
If I was going to argue with say a postdoc physics student at cambridge it might help but I talk with one of those all the time and he doesn't try this pathetic big timing when we discuss quantum theory.
youre not even arguing the point anyway. You just don't like me and are desperate to discredit me like some insecure zero sum numbskull.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
If you don't need expertise in quantum physics, why does Fryer need expertise in criminology?
Fryer's work was credited as a study ie to be published in a peer reviewed journal where the standard is much higher than an internet argument with a supposed lawyer who demonstrates no expertise in his claimed profession much less physics on any level.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
nope I'm asking why would I need it to discuss it with a shitty lawyer. The prepositional phrase is key, Crayola. You need help figuring out who the lawyer is?
If I was going to argue with say a postdoc physics student at cambridge it might help but I talk with one of those all the time and he doesn't try this pathetic big timing when we discuss quantum theory.
youre not even arguing the point anyway. You just don't like me and are desperate to discredit me like some insecure zero sum numbskull.
Well, that was a funny break down.
:cry why u no like me vy :cry
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
Fryer's work was credited as a study ie to be published in a peer reviewed journal where the standard is much higher than an internet argument with a supposed lawyer who demonstrates no expertise in his claimed profession much less physics on any level.
Oh, so since you're making off-the-cuff comments about quantum physics on an Internet message board, we won't hold you to any level of accountability or require you to have any level of expertise other than talking to a friend about it. Gotcha.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
And for the record fuzz, I like you just fine.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
Oh, so since you're making off-the-cuff comments about quantum physics on an Internet message board, we won't hold you to any level of accountability or require you to have any level of expertise other than talking to a friend about it. Gotcha.
IF I make blanket assertions to be accepted on faith then I would expect nothing less. I hold others to the same standard. Nullius en verba. Again youre not arguing the point that QM is more complex than Newtons mechanics. Youre just asshurt that I brought it up.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
And for the record fuzz, I like you just fine.
If this is how you treat people you like, going cross thread to grind that axe, then you must be a real peach to those you don't.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
IF I make blanket assertions to be accepted on faith then I would expect nothing less. I hold others to the same standard. Nullius en verba.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
Occam's razor is an excuse for the intellectually lazy. Quantum mechanics demonstrates the falsity of it completely.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
Well, that was a funny break down.
:cry why u no like me vy :cry
I don't wonder that. It doesn't bother you that I think I'm smart as much as it bothers you that I think I'm smarter than you. your rather typical frankly in how you respond to me. your behaviors match the motivation.
This is boring. I'm going to play some rocket league with my friend.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
But hey, I guess we can chock all this up to your expertise being a convo you had with a guy, once.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
I don't wonder that. It doesn't bother you that I think I'm smart as much as it bothers you that I think I'm smarter than you. your rather typical frankly in how you respond to me. your behaviors match the motivation.
This is boring. I'm going to play some rocket league with my friend.
The lady doth protest too much methinks
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
Well maybe you're not coy maybe your just too stupid to figure it out. I was being generous I guess. I'll help.
When you bring up bias on a political forum, it implies a political bias which essentially denotes confirmation bias and unreliability. It's why I stay away from pundits and try to get my news from objective journals like CSM and politico for example.
I asked if you meant a bias towards an informed opinion because you tried to conflate interest with bias. That is WC level thinking frankly.
The above is the biggest bunch of bs I have possibly ever read.
There is bias when a site even chooses to print an article on a certain subject. Objectivity and politics should not even be mentioned in the same sentence. You try to paint yourself as some sort of judge in this area is laughable.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
But hey, I guess we can chock all this up to your expertise being a convo you had with a guy, once.
No you can chalk it up to Newtonian mechanics being much simpler than schrodinger's wave equation but being unable to explain quantum behavior which is expressed as probabilities which schrodinger's equations can explain.
I've already said that. Anyway, I'm out.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
The above is the biggest bunch of bs I have possibly ever read.
There is bias when a site even chooses to print an article on a certain subject. Objectivity and politics should not even be mentioned in the same sentence. You try to paint yourself as some sort of judge in this area is laughable.
:lol oh noes! ad hominemfest is just so compelling! Really.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
Quantum mechanics being more complex than newtonian mechanics belies occam's razor else Newtonian mechanics could explain quantum behavior which they cannot. It is what it is. In the context of said discussion the explanation I had given was simpler than the formal definition. The butthurt is crossthread.
I do like now that you guys have given up on trying to prove me wrong and have now gone back to ignorance as virtue. Ridiculing someone for trying to 'talk smart' as if the alternative is preferred is absolutely delicious.
What?
All any physics does is model observations to a mathematical form. And then use the math to predict other behavior if possible. Occam's razor should not even be mentioned in your spewing above as it tries to narrow choices. Probability is used in Quantum Mechanics automatically making it more appropriate as reasonable IMO.
And you bringing this bs in the middle of a political argument makes me think you are slightly to severely autistic (looky, I'm fuzzy, I covered a range of possibilities, get it, get it?, see I'm clever)
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
:lol oh noes! ad hominemfest is just so compelling! Really.
Leave the last sentence out of my post out and then reread it then. Maybe you can look past something you use so often.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
No you can chalk it up to Newtonian mechanics being much simpler than schrodinger's wave equation but being unable to explain quantum behavior which is expressed as probabilities which schrodinger's equations can explain.
I've already said that. Anyway, I'm out.
Newtonian mechanics applied to behavior with many variables thrown in can be incredibly ugly and very, very difficult mathematically yet still be fairly accurate. Quantum mechanics is applied to the most fundamental behavior on the level of the small. You have a textbook way of comparing them. Not a working application explanation. It can all be difficult as it made up by ape brains.
We should all apologize to this site for this shit.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Gee, pgardn, sounds like you know what you're talking about. You wouldn't happen to have some education in physics, would you? Something that goes beyond having a conversation about quantum physics with a guy once?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Crayola, pedobear, sophist piece of shit (my personal favorite).
Why does Fuzzy suck so bad at insults?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
Newtonian mechanics applied to behavior with many variables thrown in can be incredibly ugly and very, very difficult mathematically yet still be fairly accurate. Quantum mechanics is applied to the most fundamental behavior on the level of the small. You have a textbook way of comparing them. Not a working application explanation. It can all be difficult as it made up by ape brains.
We should all apologize to this site for this shit.
What are you talking about?
Quantum behavior cannot be explained by classical mechanics. Instead a more complicated mechanics is required. I make no value judgement. I'm not demeaning Newton's work particularly Principia which was ground breaking. It still invalidates occam's razor as a proof.
My explanation is in the context of the argument we were having in another thread. You want me to talk about it allegorically or something?
Keep on nitpicking though. It's kinda funny.
PS Infinitesimal calculus is not 'difficult' particularly when compared to the matrices you have to use to model space for quantum calculations. That is kinda the whole point of the nit being picked.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DarrinS
Crayola, pedobear, sophist piece of shit (my personal favorite).
Why does Fuzzy suck so bad at insults?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
The lady doth protest too much methinks
And I'm glad you like it. Self realization is important.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vy65
Gee, pgardn, sounds like you know what you're talking about. You wouldn't happen to have some education in physics, would you? Something that goes beyond having a conversation about quantum physics with a guy once?
My job requires I know more biology and chemistry, with a bit of physics.
I took the dreaded quantum mechanics and try to forget it as much as possible.
I do need to know stuff, but am not comfortable talking down to people on a basketball site which is really why most of us are here when we are bored and going to sleep. So I thought.
I need the season to start.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
This is stupid. I posted one tweet where he had a picture of Brown's corpse and the position of the police truck. Since then your dumbass has been trying to pin that on me.
:lol Fraud King
:lol You
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
My job requires I know more biology and chemistry, with a bit of physics.
I took the dreaded quantum mechanics and try to forget it as much as possible.
I do need to know stuff, but am not comfortable talking down to people on a basketball site which is really why most of us are here when we are bored and going to sleep. So I thought.
I need the season to start.
Sounds like you have an interesting job. In any event, thanks for checking assholes.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
What are you talking about?
Quantum behavior cannot be explained by classical mechanics. Instead a more complicated mechanics is required. I make no value judgement. I'm not demeaning Newton's work particularly Principia which was ground breaking. It still invalidates occam's razor as a proof.
My explanation is in the context of the argument we were having in another thread. You want me to talk about it allegorically or something?
Keep on nitpicking though. It's kinda funny.
PS Infinitesimal calculus is not 'difficult' particularly when compared to the matrices you have to use to model space for quantum calculations. That is kinda the whole point of the nit being picked.
You kinda ask for it don't you think.
PS
All this can be incredibly difficult or incredibly easy. I can make it easy by just laughing at your PS by merely stating that people modeling what we perceive to be natural behavior will never end and actually could get "easier" as long as humans are around. You throwing out crap to impress people when there will be so much more (that might be less) after you and I are long gone... I find this funny.
And of course Newtonian mechanics does not explain the most fundamental behavior. Jesus h Christ he did not know about more fundamental particles. We did not even know much about the most basic biological creatures.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
You kinda ask for it don't you think.
PS
All this can be incredibly difficult or incredibly easy. I can make it easy by just laughing at your PS by merely stating that people modeling what we perceive to be natural behavior will never end and actually could get "easier" as long as humans are around. You throwing out crap to impress people when there will be so much more (that might be less) after you and I are long gone... I find this funny.
And of course Newtonian mechanics does not explain the most fundamental behavior. Jesus h Christ he did not know about more fundamental particles. We did not even know much about the most basic biological creatures.
I'm not trying to impress you. I'm trying to demonstrate how Occam's razor is not a proof. Your going cavalier for Newton's honor is amusing though. Thoe windmills need defeating.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
I'm not trying to impress you. I'm trying to demonstrate how Occam's razor is not a proof. Your going cavalier for Newton's honor is amusing though. Thoe windmills need defeating.
Newtons honor... I could not care less. This is not a frkn contest.
Do you not understand math modeling of natural behavior? Newton dealt with large objects, yes? Just how the hell is he going to assign an electron a wave function? Do you have any clue how science works? You are a product of your times, just like in so many other human endeavors. You think Einstein was some time traveler? He was not the only person thinking about time and space as malleable and taking light speed as constant. There is no secret that many people were thinking about time as we started to try and coordinate travel properly in his day. Do you not get this?
Even after Newton people took some of his ideas and created the idea of energy/work. Around what time? steam engines etc...
Einstein would be shocked at some of the consequences OTHER people would come up with from his ideas.
And you take this to mean I am playing cavalier with Newton? Wtf?
Really... Wtf?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
11:15
you keep me up for this drivel...
Christ.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
Newtons honor... I could not care less. This is not a frkn contest.
Do you not understand math modeling of natural behavior? Newton dealt with large objects, yes? Just how the hell is he going to assign an electron a wave function? Do you have any clue how science works? You are a product of your times, just like in so many other human endeavors. You think Einstein was some time traveler? He was not the only person thinking about time and space as malleable and taking light speed as constant. There is no secret that many people were thinking about time as we started to try and coordinate travel properly in his day. Do you not get this?
Even after Newton people took some of his ideas and created the idea of energy/work. Around what time? steam engines etc...
Einstein would be shocked at some of the consequences OTHER people would come up with from his ideas.
And you take this to mean I am playing cavalier with Newton? Wtf?
Really... Wtf?
Again I'm not criticizing Newton. He was avante garde for his time. Nonetheless, classical mechanics is much simpler than quantum mechanics. This is not a value judgment; it's a statement of fact.
The argument is regarding Occam's razor which states that the simplest explanation is the best. In the case of physics that is not the case. Caught up yet?
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
Again I'm not criticizing Newton. He was avante garde for his time. Nonetheless, classical mechanics is much simpler than quantum mechanics. This is not a value judgment; it's a statement of fact.
The argument is regarding Occam's razor which states that the simplest explanation is the best. In the case of physics that is not the case. Caught up yet?
Quit that shit. You said I was playing cavalier with Newton. So you rephrase it to mean you are not criticizing Newton. Why do you pull this shit?
Caught up yet? Seriously...
You really think I don't get it.
From what I can tell you are one of the people who walks into a room and yells "physics, calculus, quantum mechanics" just because a majority of people don't find these things interesting or were taught poorly in the first place. I think I could take 90% of the people on this board and take them slowly though science starting with physics and work up to some biological phenomena. I think I could get them to understand why biological systems only use very discrete energy levels to sense the world around them thus giving them a feel for how little we can understand without physical analogy. They would understand more than you in your quantum world. Because you happen to be concentrating on that right now hardly makes you an expert in anything useful. This would be more like an idiot savant stemming off one specific area of human endeavor.
And Just because one goes through a subject quickly or slowly does not necessarily indicate how profoundly they understand. You can use your Hibbert fields to impress people with a way to more usefully express wave functions, But the physical reality of what all this means is much more important. One can easily illustrate how a good algebra background makes slightly complex calculus doable, but the central idea of limits are not appreciated in differentiation or integration as it applies to some physical reality. This is the real beauty. Not getting a hard on for some very specific part of math that allows you to do other math.
I bet I could give find a version of a first year physics in HS as given by the new introductary AP1 exam and you would fail to make a good score. (A colleague told me it was more difficult than the calculus based physics because it dealt with ideas with much less math and more with concepts; his son was not one of the 4% nationwide who got a 5) Probably because you have not done it in a while. And this would make you stupid? Because it covers Newtonian mechanics and you are way, way beyond that.
So maybe I go and intensely study topology and come back and insult people on a basketball board. That would make me feel so good.
Enough already. I hope the majority of the board just skips all this drivel, I would.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pgardn
Quit that shit. You said I was playing cavalier with Newton. So you rephrase it to mean you are not criticizing Newton. Why do you pull this shit?
Caught up yet? Seriously...
You really think I don't get it.
From what I can tell you are one of the people who walks into a room and yells "physics, calculus, quantum mechanics" just because a majority of people don't find these things interesting or were taught poorly in the first place. I think I could take 90% of the people on this board and take them slowly though science starting with physics and work up to some biological phenomena. I think I could get them to understand why biological systems only use very discrete energy levels to sense the world around them thus giving them a feel for how little we can understand without physical analogy. They would understand more than you in your quantum world. Because you happen to be concentrating on that right now hardly makes you an expert in anything useful. This would be more like an idiot savant stemming off one specific area of human endeavor.
And Just because one goes through a subject quickly or slowly does not necessarily indicate how profoundly they understand. You can use your Hibbert fields to impress people with a way to more usefully express wave functions, But the physical reality of what all this means is much more important. One can easily illustrate how a good algebra background makes slightly complex calculus doable, but the central idea of limits are not appreciated in differentiation or integration as it applies to some physical reality. This is the real beauty. Not getting a hard on for some very specific part of math that allows you to do other math.
I bet I could give find a version of a first year physics in HS as given by the new introductary AP1 exam and you would fail to make a good score. (A colleague told me it was more difficult than the calculus based physics because it dealt with ideas with much less math and more with concepts; his son was not one of the 4% nationwide who got a 5) Probably because you have not done it in a while. And this would make you stupid? Because it covers Newtonian mechanics and you are way, way beyond that.
So maybe I go and intensely study topology and come back and insult people on a basketball board. That would make me feel so good.
Enough already. I hope the majority of the board just skips all this drivel, I would.
Well that was a big waste of time.
I got to the first stupid characterization and quit reading. You still haven't caught up.
-
Re: Black Harvard Professor and The Economist 15 year study
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FuzzyLumpkins
I really couldn't say for certain but you keep carping about it with snark such as this so it is what it is. I do have some theories about it if you'd like to hear them. Occam's razor is demonstrably not a proof as evidenced by QM. In response I've gotten this petulance for two days now.
Why would I need s Ph. D. to comment on it or more specifically, crayola, why would I need one to argue or otherwise comment on it with a shitty lawyer?
was this claim ever made, though?
