Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-07-2012, 10:23 AM
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
Has anyone else pointed out correlation does not equal causation yet? I read an article in Skeptic a while back that was titled "Tooth Fairy Science." It was a really great article that you should read that pertains to your assumptions.
http://www.skepdic.com/toothfairyscience.html


As for black people are more athletic than white people, I chalk that up to something else too. Probably environment, poverty level, motivation, support systems, etc. I mean just look at the all-time medal counts for the Olympics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-time_Ol...edal_table


It is certainly true that genetic diversity is the highest in Africa where we all descend from, but to say that black people are more athletic is wrong. There may be additional factors that result in a larger proportion ending up in professional sports, but even that is skewed given the fact that there are sports where you often see other races dominating (hockey anyone?). There are other factors and my guess is that anyone of any race with good hand-eye coordination could excel in any sport.

Is this place still a shithole run by a dumbass calvinist?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
23-07-2012, 01:09 PM
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
The old race debate. Hobo
Like a warmed over casserole it just begins to loose it's flavor, texture and any resemblanse to the original dish.
The LEFT has it's template, the RIGHT has it's template.
They sit on both side of the road and throw ideology at each other.
Both claim victory; the truth; the moral high ground in any debate.
The truth is:
- You don't know the truth.
- You don't know what effect skin color has on opportunity.
- You can't tie minority status to outcomes without committing "fallacy of composition".
- Statistics are useless in predicting outcomes.
How did the statistics predict Oprah Winfrey, Barak Obama, Tiger Woods.
My advice is to stop using over generalized stastics and look to the individual.
Race is a socially derived description - It's just made up!
We are 99.988% genetically identical and most people are by definition "multi-racial"
The stereotype is in the race label itself.
I have an 8 year old and I've banned the race labels in my home.
It must stop somewhere. Why not in your home, today?

The old gods are dead, let's invent some new ones before something really bad happens.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Thomas's post
23-07-2012, 02:43 PM
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
I like a piece of what Thomas said (I like the whole post too but one piece stands out) about statistics being incapable of prediction. When we assign odds to something or establish a likelihood of an event occurring or an object existing, we are merely demonstrating the error associated with our current knowledge and current ignorance. If we use statistics retroactively to figure out what happened, they are descriptive, not predictive. As to the first point though, statistics don't actually tell us whether life exists on other planets or if big foot is real, despite the fact that someone might come up with a measure for each at 1 in a billion. The existence of life in the universe somewhere other than Earth is either 0 or 1, it can't be any other value. Either it does exist elsewhere, or it doesn't. The odds we assign are merely related to our guesses about what life needs in order to originate and survive. The simpler explanation is big foot. Either big foot exists or it doesn't, but you aren't likely to find a single scientist who will say big foot's nonexistence is 100% certain. They may say 99.999999999% certain, but that 0.000000001% doesn't mean big foot does exist, it merely means there is uncertainty related to our limited knowledge and/or error in our methods that prohibits us from saying 0 or 1. I mean the likelihood that a gorilla exists is 1, the likelihood that one is standing behind me at this moment is best approximated using calculus by saying that the answer approaches 0, but we can't actually show mathematically that the exact value is 0.

Is this place still a shithole run by a dumbass calvinist?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
23-07-2012, 03:01 PM
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
(23-07-2012 02:43 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I mean the likelihood that a gorilla exists is 1, the likelihood that one is standing behind me at this moment is best approximated using calculus by saying that the answer approaches 0, but we can't actually show mathematically that the exact value is 0.
... and that was the last we ever heard from TheBeardedDude Ohmy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
23-07-2012, 03:27 PM
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
(22-07-2012 06:12 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  You want to know the most racist shit I have ever seen in my life??
That law they have in some States that says employers MUST employe a certain percentage of black/hispanic/whatever people.
Tell me, a white man and a black man apply for the same job. The white man has higher qualifications, higher work experience compared to the black man. Yet because the employer must meat his quoter the black man gets the job. Please someone explain to me how that is NOT racist. What if that man is a doctor, does that mean I have to receive less then best quality surgery because the hospital was afraid of being a little "racist".

Muffers,
The courts in the US have agreed with you about the quota thing being essentially unfair. They justified it as a temporary redress for past wrongs. Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the Grutter decision, and in it, she said 25 years would be long enough, for the redress. There is another case before the court now, Fisher v University of Texas, which the present court most likely will end the nonsense. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...-fast.html

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
The noblest of the dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2012, 06:22 PM
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
(22-07-2012 06:12 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
Quote: Samoans are statistically overrepresented in the NFL and Dominicans in MLB. Why? It's a chance to get the fuck off the island.
There's more Samoans here then there is in Samoa.
Same with Tonga.

Pffft ... just traded one island for another. Tongue

Breathing - it's more art than science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
23-07-2012, 08:16 PM
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
(23-07-2012 05:04 AM)Filox Wrote:  
(23-07-2012 04:43 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Oh son, don't get me started on the Maori I will not stop and you'll have to cancel all your plans for a day to read it.


First of all, I was referring to, as you would call, an African-American black people, not Maori, but I guess Maori in New Zeeland have the same "reputation" as the blacks in USA... Now that you have mentioned them, can you try to see the parallel between blacks in USA and Maori in NZ? Weren't both groups oppressed by white incomers, they both had none to minimum education, nobody wanted to give them jobs... And what, now you do not like them, because they are criminals? How very, very strange is that, I really wonder how could they...

You just need to carefully study the white-mans history and how they treated the native nations, once they take their country.

If you want to point fingers, point at white people.
Oppressed? Hardly. Maori were given a treaty (only 1 of 2 'natives' to receive one, the other being Native Americans) and given land rights (to their own land yes but that's not the point, the point is they could sell it rather then British just take it), they set up small businesses etc.. New Zealand was colonized differently to most British colonies I think. The focus was on Australia and we were sort of considered an extension of that (actually being governed by New South Whales at one point). So the British were not hell bent on killing off the local people but rather making peace, after all the Maori would have won that war easily I should think. And so as a result Maori were hardly oppressed by standards of the time.
What little war that did break out was a result of Maori simply not wanting 'intruders' on their land, but the British had support from Maori Iwi (tribes) and so those Maori Iwi that did not support British rule were by no means the majority. It wasn't like the next Zulu war or something.
The whole relationship I would consider pretty mutual. Today Maori may disagree, but some may agree it depends on who you talk too.
There was problems with the Land Wars where some Iwi 'rebelled' and so Britain confiscated land as punishment and in some cases land that was owned by Iwi who did not rebel. BUT that has been sorted, that land has been given back to local Iwi by the crown.
So by no means have the Maori had such horrible atrocities inflicted against them.

I don't like Maori because of reasons I mentioned in other posts that they have same opportunities but choice to shun all that and resort to gangs or whatever and then have the nerve to bitch and moan when they can't afford anything because the benefit is shit. Like, it just annoys me when I worked in the gas station and we were the only gas station in town that took WINS (Working for Families, the benefit agency) vouchers for petrol. So it was mostly Maori that would come in with these things, it would be a voucher for say $50 petrol. Now, we have to give petrol vouchers if they don't use the full $50, and they new this. So they would put $10 in their car, get $40 petrol vouchers and then buy a 50g pack of Port Royal (tobacco) which would cost like $40. Now, you can't afford to put petrol in your car and you're buying fucking tobacco?? I had friends that worked at New World (supermarket, 'grocery store') and they'd get the same vouchers, Maori's too, and they'd have the same thing. I was talking to a mate of mine he said he had one come in and he scanned all the items and it was just over the amount on the voucher, so what does that lady put back? The smokes she just asked for? Nope! She put back several cans of baby food. ("But muffs, maybe she had some baby food at home" Then why was she buying more?!).
THAT is a life style choice. I don't care what anyone says, when you decide to feed your habit over feeding your own baby! then you are a horrible person. And this isn't an isolated situation.
And those are the people that complain the benefit is only $215, those that spend $20-30-40 on tobacco.
Alcohol is the exact same.

New Zealand is just such a different country to the rest of the world. You have to understand that here the gap between rich and poor is minimal. We don't have super super rich just like we only have like 100 homeless people (by choice). Our welfare system and tax rebates are really good if you're poor. Like, yes they are shit in the sense that it's not like if you worked, but you're not gonna starve.
And this is one of the reasons I hate a lot of them, because they feel entitled to more, always feel entitled to more.
"Why is John down the road able to afford nice things and I'm not!" Oh well, maybe because John has a fucking job!.
They truly feel that the benefit should more then just "survive", and it pisses me off.
When I HLJ and I were talking the other night he said Singapore doesn't have any welfare of any type. I tell you I almost fucking shat myself, brilliant!. He said charities pick up the slack. They have effectively privatized the welfare system, and I think that's how we should go. It has changed my whole outlook on welfare systems.
As for education, here it's nothing like the US. Here it is very much go to the closest school to you. And even if you do go to a private school everyone is taught the same shit. So universities just look at grades and that's it. This is what i mean by same opportunity. I went to public school, my three flatmates went to private school yet here we are at the same university.
Which brings me to my next hate about Maori. Educational opportunities. I wanted to apply for scholarships before coming to university but as a white male whos parents are alive and are not both on the benefit there was none, absolutely none that I could apply for. Not a single fucking one. There is so many scholarships out there for Maori I don't think any Maori in this whole country pays for their university. Not to mention all through school Maori receive special help. If you're Maori you're entitled to extra study classes or whatever. You had you're own area of the school with Maori teachers etc.. Or awards at the end of the year, lots of Maori specific awards.
Obviously they're trying to get more Maori through school, but it is exactly like the job quoter situation. It's trying to be not racist but in turn it's being racist.
And university is no different, it's exactly the same as High school. Maori get extra study classes, get smaller classes, can seek individual help from a large staff of Maori tutors etc.. As a white male I get nothing like that.
And guess what? It continues throughout life, extra services provided for Maori mothers, extra welfare benefits for Maori etc..
And then this is not including help from their Iwi (tribe), which I'm not complaining about, but I'm just adding that they are in no way short on financial support or support in education, life as a whole, job help etc..
And yet every night on the news there they are, bitching and complaining, "Oh the benefit isn't enough" or "John key is a racist pig!" or whatever. Always demanding and feeling entitled to more when they can't open their fucking eyes to how much they already have handed to their lazy asses.

Now before I get ahead of myself I will say that this doesn't apply to all Maori. There is a lot of Maori who I would consider just like everyone else. They grow up, they have a nice job, they have a family etc..
The Maori I'm talking about mostly resides in parts of Auckland and that shit little town just out of my home town.
It seems in small towns Iwi 'straighten' them out, they're not in gangs and such. And the further south you get the more 'white' they seem to become.

I dunno, they just have it better then what they think they do and considering they are only 8% of the population they have WAY WAY to much say politically. Why should 92% of the population constantly bend over or empty their pockets to 8%, that is the real racism here.

And then there is immigrants...

Quote:
Quote:You want to know the most racist shit I have ever seen in my life??
That law they have in some States that says employers MUST employe a certain percentage of black/hispanic/whatever people.
Tell
me, a white man and a black man apply for the same job. The white man
has higher qualifications, higher work experience compared to the black
man. Yet because the employer must meat his quoter the black man gets
the job. Please someone explain to me how that is NOT racist. What if
that man is a doctor, does that mean I have to receive less then best
quality surgery because the hospital was afraid of being a little
"racist".

Muffers,
The courts in the US have
agreed with you about the quota thing being essentially unfair. They
justified it as a temporary redress for past wrongs. Sandra Day O'Connor
wrote the Grutter decision, and in it, she said 25 years would be long
enough, for the redress. There is another case before the court now,
Fisher v University of Texas, which the present court most likely will
end the nonsense. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...-fast.html
Good.

Quote: Pffft ... just traded one island for another. [Image: tongue.gif]
yea pretty much.

I don't talk gay, I don't walk gay, it's like people don't even know I'm gay unless I'm blowing them.
[Image: 10h27hu.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2012, 10:03 PM
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
(23-07-2012 04:43 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  
Quote: There was this girl in high school, she had the same education as
another girl. The first girl's parents were drug addicts who had many
children younger than her. She would spend night after night taking care
of these children, one a baby, while her parents were out getting high.
Once in awhile her parents would bring their bad crowd home and she'd
have to fight off strange men or keep quiet kids and protect them. There
wasn't much food in the house and what food there was she sacrificed
for her younger siblings, often leaving her starving at school. Her
parents tried to coerce her to do things for food or money for thing for
school, like run drug errands for them or keep secrets. She couldn't
stay awake to receive her education in class, and often got penalized
and less opportunities from teachers and peers for it.



The other girl in the same class with the same education lived in a rich
home with a balanced family life. Her lunches weren't only provided but
packed for her. She got to travel often through out the year to not
only adventurous places but relaxing places. She was encouraged to have
extra curricular activities that enhanced her personality and peaked her
interests.



Tell me who will absorb their equal education better? I am betting it's
the nourished and rested mind who can focus on tasks at hand instead of
basic survival for the next 24hours.

In this situation I would ask why are those children in child custody?


Me too. Sadly, a bit of the answer is that 'the system' isn't perfect and this happens to not just this girl, but many many others, every day. I didn't make this up, this is a real example. It's a too common story.



(23-07-2012 04:43 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  And even then yes it's a horrible upbringing but it shouldn't instantly mean that child becomes exactly like her parents.
What happens when that child is 18, 19 20's..? Do they follow in their parents footsteps or do they make something out of themselves? Which brings it back to my first point about making something of yourself.

Unfortunately by that age she is broken, addicted to drugs herself, running the streets and has too poor of grades to have options. That's the point I'm making. There was no launching pad for a fantastic life, ever.

(23-07-2012 04:43 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  And so the girl who is well off and has this nice life should somehow
be.. punished? or made to feel guilty because of this other girl? Is
that fair on the rich girl?

I never said or implied any of that, I just gave an ideal comparison. Maybe you assumed this? This girl should feel thankful if anything. She deserves what she got, so do my kids, so do everyones. The point is, not every child has these opportunities- whole communities of people don't.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-07-2012, 01:12 AM
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
Ears...

Yes, I read through all this text and now I feel tired and used up... Smile I have to say, this sounds like a brutally racist post, but unfortunately, I understand what you mean and you did clarify some things pretty good. So I do not see it as racial, but as a pointer to some social problems in NZ.

A long time ago I watched Once Were Warriors movie and I think it showed the Maori life in NZ pretty well. Of course, we should remember that there are normal people and that there are those who just want to live on the tits of the country.

I also had no idea that NZ gives so much more benefits to Maori, it does make sense, since they are the natives there and the government needs to try to "equalize" them and the rest...

Hey Thomas, let me ask you one thing, you and the rest of the people here, I really want to hear your objective opinion, concerning the "better athletes" with black skin... I might be wrong here, but can you influence on a gene pool and have "better people" if you pick and choose only the healthiest and the strongest individuals who you then take somewhere and they live and breed there for generations, surrounded only with those "chosen", genetically good people. Because this is exactly what happened when the white people were abducting black people from Africa and bringing them to USA. This is what people do today on farms when they grow live stock and even vegetables. Selective breeding.

So, is there any scientific validity here? Am I wrong or could this actually have some meaning even today? I have a strong logical tinkling that this can be true, but... I could be completely wrong, so let the brain thrusting begin.

Also, we have to remember that Africa was and still is one of the harshest environments to survive, with little to no health care (depends what part, of course), so people there can die more easy from something that in EU we just take 1 pill and we are saved. This also produces stronger individuals, because the weak ones can die much easier, so only the strong survive. The harsher the environment and the less equipments people have to protect form the environment, the more natural selection has some meaning and influences the next generations.

This is NOT a racial issue, this is nature at work, can it work like this and does it leave a mark in human gene pool?

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Filox's post
24-07-2012, 11:35 AM (This post was last modified: 24-07-2012 11:40 AM by TrulyX.)
RE: Am I racist? Or just a statistician?
(22-07-2012 12:18 AM)Atheist Chiefs fan! Wrote:  A). going down an alley with 3 black people dressed liked thugs dancing to (what looks like) rap music.
or
B). going down an alley with 3 white people dressed in suits.

Now if it was
A). 3 black people in suits. Looking to be maybe theists, perhaps some Jehovahs witnesses preaching.
or
B). 3 White people looking shitty and trashy as hell desperate for $.

LMAO; That probably made my day.

That wasn't the best scenario to draw up, toward your point.

Maybe that was kind of racist, very prejudice, and pretty damn ignorant.

If it was to be funny, I guess you're okay, but if you were actually being serious. RuhRoh.

To me, that was a good stand up act; a comedian should steal that shit. Three black guys in an alley dancing??? No 40s, no weed, no dice, no money laid out, only 3, no guns, not dressed like gang members, you didn't add 'or Latino', etc, they are just dancing and dressed like "thugs". How could that be scary? That's almost 100% race based discrimination; no other factor that I could think of could come into a person's mind to lead to a bad situation. There is just the color of their skin. Really the worse case scenario would be one of the little bastards pissed that you fucked up their dance move and wanna fight. But, then you would have to think, if they spent all of that time learning to dance, or if they dance at all, they sure as the hell can't fight for shit.

You did add in the second scenario though. Maybe you just don't like poor people. Or, maybe, you have a suit fetish.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: