Stack Exchange
log in

user2647513

 Discussion on answer by tim: Did Greg…

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Dec 28, 2022 18:00
@barbecue that this is a political stunt is irrelevant. They were bused to a sanctuary city the same way thousands of other are bused every single day, the literal only difference was a pit stop for a photo op in front of the VP's house. That you don't like how it makes one side look does not mean that this was some inhumane atrocity, it's business as usual.
user2647513
Dec 28, 2022 17:58
@LawnmowerMan Well somebody better tell the Biden administration given that they're transporting illegal aliens all across the country every day on our taxpayer dollars.
user2647513
Dec 28, 2022 17:57
@JoeW As I mentioned in my comment, the dropoff was coordinated with a local church.
user2647513
Dec 28, 2022 08:44
@barbecue these illegal aliens are being bused all over the country every day. The only difference between this "stunt" and any other routine transport is that Abbot arranged to have them pit stop in front of the VP's residence. It's high time she started doing something about the (not new) crisis at the border and it's high time people stopped playing dumb. This is unsustainable migration and the outrage over having people switch buses after being granted free transportation into a country illegally is partisan hysteria.
user2647513
Dec 28, 2022 08:44
@Acccumulation "The migrants were then helped by the Migrant Solidarity Mutual Aid Network and taken to a local church, according to 7News reporter Christian Flores." You didn't even look because you don't care, it makes abbot look bad. CNN makes it seem like this was some inhumane abuse. These people are here illegally and the worst part of their experience is changing buses. Get real, the rampant bias around here is as pathetic as wikipedia. inb4 "comments are not for extended discussion" foxnews.com/us/…
user2647513
Dec 28, 2022 08:44
"bused off human beings as a political stunt" as though they wouldn't have been bused all the same to another location? You've also left out that Abbot coordinated with local resources. This answer is politically biased, just like CNN's shamefully dishonest reporting on the matter.
2
 

 Discussion on answer by pinegulf: Did…

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Feb 11, 2022 15:03
@KonradRudolph can you link to those studies that conclusively show cloth or surgical masks (or even N95 masks) stopping the spread particulate from an aerosolized virus? At least for the first year or so it was taken on faith that masks work and I don't believe there has been any published proof. Certainly no RCTs that I'm aware of. In fact I'm aware of a number of studies that show that cloth and surgical masks provide a wholly negligible benefit (on the order 2% or less risk reduction).
 

 Discussion on answer by Fizz: Is the …

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Aug 23, 2021 21:29
@fyrepenguin as far as I know the comments on answers are for criticising answers. Suppression of dissent is directly relevant to this answer because it reduces the reliability of the "approved" statistics used to "debunk" the graphic in the question. I want to use the comments as they are intended, without being censored by overzealous mods for asking the wrong questions or questioning the wrong "facts". The evidence for vaccine safety is DRASTICALLY overstated exactly because of attitudes like yours, where people are all too eager to twist rules to censor wrongthink.
user2647513
Aug 23, 2021 21:29
@csstudent1418 And predictably my comment regarding suppression of dissent, and why that's relevant to this question, has also been deleted. The people running the show (mods) have no incentive to foster actual discussion. This censorship is counterproductive and ascientific - in truth it hampers progress because "uncertain" claims are still potential leads to any researcher who reads SO/wikipedia/reddit, etc. If the vaccine is shown to be comparable in harm to the virus then I hope these overeager censors across the web will eat their smug, obstinate self-rightousness.
 

 Discussion on question by Sursula: Ho…

Imported from a comment discussion on academia.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Jun 22, 2021 23:06
This has been a long discussion and I am not interested in digressing to a debate on the specifics of my last point regarding the racial equity movement.

I hope you'll at least agree that solving problems is made difficult by the refusal to even consider certain causes - and falsely insisting that there is no scientific basis for racial classification does exactly that, by justifying the externalization of what very well may be internal causes. We cannot know unless we are willing to perform the necessary research, which, first and foremost, requires dispelling with such false notions agai…
user2647513
Jun 22, 2021 22:55
@JochenGlueck "So mathematically this is not a choice of a coordinate system (as I had assumed previously) but a projection onto a subspace that is applied before identifying clusters" When I refer to clustering axes, I am actually referring to the definition of a coordinate space where each axis represents the expression of a trait of interest. To claim that racial traits are not sufficiently clustered, one would need to choose a deliberately inadequate set of axes on which to cluster. For example, defining the coordinate space on skin color alone is clearly insufficient and supports the c…
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 23:21
@user9716869 My issue is with the common assertion (repeated by @JochenGlueck) that "[racial] traits are not sufficiently clustered" to categorize groups of people by ethnicity. @JochenGlueck If we are in agreement that one may cluster groups by e.g. facial features and skin tone and use those clusters to predict culture and geneology, then we have the necessary minimum components to classify humans into racial or ethnic groups.

"You're talking about correlations between genetic traits, physical traits and geographical provenance" yes, this exactly describes race/ethnicity, i.e. "categoriz…
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:48
They merely demonstrate that certain clustering axes are [deliberately] inadequate to capture correlated variations.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:47
@JochenGlueck Further, your posted sources do not contradict my argument. I have explained why.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:45
You should be able to deconstruct my argument without referring to my lack of sources, since it's a basic mathematical argument, and the same clustering that is used for ancestry analysis without controversy.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:44
That doesn't mean it is logically unsound.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:44
@JochenGlueck You want me to cite evidence that skin color + facial features are correlated with cultural and geographic provenance? You want me to cite articles to prove that East Asians are genetically, physically, and culturally distinct from Subsaharan Africans, Australian Aborigines, etc? The other user's comment speaks to my other point regarding politicization. Arguing against this contrived "antiracist" zeitgeist is career suicide in academia.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:30
so, again, the fact that specific clustering axes around human genes and culture are invalid does not preclude the notions of race and ethnicity, no matter how many contrived encyclopedia articles you post.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:29
And if you expand beyond skin color and include facial features then it becomes obvious that the notion that "races don't exist" is nonsense because we may trivially pick out cultural and geographic provenance based entirely on skin color and facial features.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:27
"You can cluster meaningfully by biological sex; you cannot cluster meaningfully by, say, skin color." Yes, which is my point, skin color is a deliberately inadequate clustering axis you've chosen to support your argument. But you can clearly cluster by skin color and, say, geographic origin, and immediately capture culture and behavioral variation
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:26
@JochenGlueck Science is not beyond reproach, especially when it is politicized.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:21
Not to mention the influence of genes and culture on behavior and social outcome - a taboo but not invalid subject.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:20
The fact that some choice axes for clustering of human genes and culture are wrong or imprecise does not preclude the fact that a valid, measurable clustering basis exists. It's the foundation of ancestry analysis and at the very least has implications for medicine because of predisposition to disease.
user2647513
Jun 21, 2021 15:19
"The problem about any biological definition of "race" (the problem which is also referred to in the Britannica article) is that these traits are not sufficiently clustered" This is only true if you deliberately choose invalid or vague clusters to make a point. Human genomes trivially cluster around geography and culture, and insisting otherwise is purely politically motivated. This is the nature of the reality of genetic and cultural inheritance.
 

 Discussion on answer by spacetyper: M…

Imported from a comment discussion on academia.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Jun 18, 2021 01:08
Do you honestly believe that the average pro-vaxxer is any more qualified than the average anti-vaxxer to determine what is and is not misinformation? All you've outlined here is a method for spreading your propaganda and suppressing that of others. It's telling of the culture on stackoverflow that an answer which presupposes that only republicans spread misinformation has 20+ upvotes. This false consensus around the safety of the vaccine, and the effort to suppress dissent, is fundamentally anti-scientific. There are mounting, scientifically valid, apolitical reasons to be skeptical.
 

 Discussion on answer by LUser: Why do…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Mar 3, 2021 14:40
@MegaCrow Your perspective is extremely partisan, like most online. You've missed the point, like most of the other answers here. You may not agree with the opposition, but you should at least make an effort to understand it, rather than assuming everyone on the right is ignorant and callous.
user2647513
Mar 3, 2021 14:40
This is one of the only two answers to this question that isn't written by leftists looking into an opposing mindset that they fundamentally do not understand. The rest of these answers effectively describe caricatures, slanderous at that. They fundamentally do not understand Trump's appeal, and it's not some blind cult-like worship that the media has successfully indoctrinated trump opposers into believing to be the driving factor behind his success. Trump is the only politician who speaks without restraint against leftist policies - and that's more than enough to make up for his flaws.
 

 Discussion on answer by David Hammen:…

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Oct 11, 2020 17:58
@PaulJohnson This isn't denialism, it's necessary skepticism considering the numerous phenomena with orders of magnitude differences in periodicity which interfere constructively and destructively to influence climate. The truth is that 10-50 years of data is much closer to the timescale of weather than it is to climate. This is a fundamental question of properly sampling time series data, media-fueled zeitgeist be damned.
user2647513
Oct 11, 2020 17:58
I take issue with this "climate change" scapegoat. We are effectively extrapolating time series data from an instantaneous measurement, considering that climate shifts occur on scales of thousands of years at a minimum and we have only a few decades of accurate data.
user2647513
Oct 11, 2020 17:58
You should probably add that one major contributor of the recent increase is lack of maintenance by power companies, who are sitting on top of billions of dollars of rotting infrastructure which is nearing or past end of life. Transmission lines fail and spark fires, e.g. here, here
 

 Discussion on answer by LаngLаngС: Ha…

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Jun 26, 2020 16:16
it is frankly disrespectful to associate the modern day antifa movement with D-Day.
 

 Discussion on answer by Lag: Did Mart…

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Jun 11, 2020 08:23
The fact that buzzfeed(?!) reports that there is no credible information does not mean there is no credible information. No "credible" media is running the twitter video of the man insinuating that he was looking for trouble. Also it's absolutely laughable that anyone would take his counsel's statement as evidence of anything. This answer doesn't actually answer anything - and how could it? How do you prove that evidence doesn't exist? This is propaganda.
user2647513
Jun 11, 2020 08:23
By the way, this is exactly how a partisan media establishment would manufacture consensus. One outlet reports on something (true, untrue, or half true), a couple outlets pick it up as secondary sources, and now you have enough for a wikipedia article, regardless of what actually happened.
 

 Discussion on answer by paulj: How to…

Imported from a comment discussion on academia.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Jan 29, 2020 22:36
@DonThousand You said "The Eastern Europeans and the Jews were not enslaved for the last 1000 years. I don't see the equivalence". I was replying to your last comment, not the sum of our discussion. But the point applies in general, reverse discrimination cannot be implemented without deciding what kind of historic, systematic abuse justify preferential treatment and what kind do not. Which is a significant soft power open to dangerous abuse. Anyway, as I said previously, I think this conversation has gone on long enough and is way off topic now, so I'm out of here.
2
user2647513
Jan 29, 2020 22:36
@DonThousand Why does slavery get preferential treatment over disenfranchisement or genocide? And the razing of economies happened to countries outside of the US - that's a separate topic from the systematic forces allegedly responsible for modern day inequality. I think our conflict boils down to a disagreement over the extent to which greater forces have led to different success distributions, and to what extent it is valid to attempt to correct for them; and this is probably an appropriate time to agree to disagree.
2
user2647513
Jan 29, 2020 22:36
@DonThousand these "refutations" are not as rigorous as you believe. What about Jews who have experienced thousands of years of persecution? What about the various white European groups who were treated with disdain for decades in the U.S. (Poles, Eastern Europeans, Italians). Why do we even group all of these different groups together as "whites" as if all of their experiences are the same? Inequality of outcome is not indicative of inequality of opportunity which requires active correction. Why do CERTAIN minorities get special treatment?
3
user2647513
Jan 29, 2020 22:36
@Reid I imagine you'll extend this assertion to Asians and especially Jews, who are hugely disproportionately represented among Ivy League attendees and other "successful" professional and social strata, despite decades (or centuries) of discrimination, right? The issue is that although it feels dangerously like "common sense", there is no rigorous proof of the degree to which discrimination of certain minorities has contributed to their lack of success. Further, the fact that successful men are white does not mean that while men in general are privileged. This thinking only justifies racism.
3
user2647513
Jan 29, 2020 22:36
@DonThousand Whether you wish to count it as discriminatory or not does not erase the face that that allowing race or gender to influence hiring IS discriminatory - even if you think its for a good cause. Besides the fallacy of judging an individual based on a distribution, the links between historic "disadvantage" (an extremely vague catch all) are VASTLY overstated, as evidenced by other disadvantaged groups like that of my own family who had no issues succeeding and entering the upper middle class. Because my skin happens to be white-ish I would have been disadvantaged by such hiring.
2
user2647513
Jan 29, 2020 22:36
I can't imagine the rational answer being anything other than "I treat them the same way I treat 'non-diverse' students", but I know that's not the answer they're looking for. Also I think the fact that they are using the word "diverse" as code for "non-white male" is indicative of the strong implicit bias that they are forcing and the fact that this is now socially acceptable is IMO shameful.
2
 

 Discussion on question by Azurry: Get…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
user2647513
Jan 9, 2020 10:12
I don't know of an appropriate way of doing this, but you seem competent and underappreciated, and it just so happens my company is hiring. If there's a way for us to get in contact I'd be happy to take a look at your resume! Maybe put an email in your profile? Not sure what protocol is on StackExchange...
 

 Discussion on question by Robert Colu…

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Jan 7, 2020 20:47
@aroth
>The CoC is poorly framed, not least due to including religion (a thing you choose) in with race/gender/etc. (things you don't). Your mistake is in presuming that the various genders that have recently sprung up are involuntary. That really is the crux of this whole controversy, and when you shut down any discourse to the contrary you are simply choosing your own political opinion as fact. Beyond gender dysmorphia, which itself is a young field, the science is far from settled.
 

 Discussion on answer by ribs2spare: W…

Imported from a comment discussion on academia.stackexchange.c...
user2647513
Oct 31, 2019 00:35
Thank you. The increasing angles to which certain elements of society are bending over backwards to accommodate for any and every perceived outgroup (i.e. not straight white and male) are only encouraging worse outcomes for society at large. Standards exist in order to facilitate communication and cooperation - it is simply not possible to develop perfectly inclusive standards without defeating the purpose of having common systems in the first place. Where do we stop? Should we require classes to be taught in every native language spoken by the students?
3
 

 Discussion on answer by phoog: How to…

Imported from a comment discussion on travel.stackexchange.com...
user2647513
Sep 24, 2017 10:15
They also regularly get physical with "compliant" marks already, what's to stop them from coming to blows? It's all assault anyway, right?
user2647513
Sep 24, 2017 10:14
@phoog Why is everyone in this thread so desperate to presume that these are rational, level headed people? They're street scammers. They're far more likely to be impulsive and irrational by white collar standards.
user2647513
Sep 23, 2017 17:31
That sounds like an excellent way to get your phone snatched out of your hands and stolen or thrown on the ground, at best. At worse, you may get into a physical confrontation before the police arrive.