How valid is /pol/'s shitposting?

How valid is /pol/'s shitposting?

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html
crimeinamerica.net/2010/01/25/crime-statistics-no-prison-sentences-for-most-felony-convictions/
crimeinamerica.net/2014/01/13/42-percent-of-felony-convictions-result-in-a-sentence-to-prison-33-percent-go-to-jail/
dc.state.fl.us/pub/recidivism/2001/factors.html
nij.gov/topics/corrections/reentry/pages/employment.aspx
dropoutprevention.org/engage/incarceration-within-american-and-nordic-prisons/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

back to

Nope, decreased amount of people commiting crimes with a high IQ is fact they are not being cauht... Because this is not commited, but recorded crime statistics...

It's literally social science. Which is another way of saying that it's pseudoscience but a lot of people take it seriously, just like alternative medicine.

This has to be b8. No one on Veeky Forums is this dumb.

b-b-but muh social statistics and correlations are definitive causal evidence!

Can you explain what is wrong with the statistics?

Look at this post Look at your self now

Its good this corealations you cannot validate by yourself guide your life so much by the fact you trust them, somebody having control of you is obvious...

lol, yes that is exactly what a social science retard would say. Not only are they incapable of producing reproducible controlled experiments and not only do they refuse to even fucking try but a fuckload of research is flat out falsified and droves of social scientists always run to it's defense by using a clearly flawed understanding of formal logic.

The social "scientist's" position is indefensible.

IQ is normalized.

High IQ people commit crimes too.

They're just too smart to get caught so it doesn't manifest itself on the crime stats.

Niggers are nothing but animals

The research methods.

In proper scientific research:
>Researcher poses a falsifiable hypothesis and plans a set of controlled & reproducible experiments in order to try and disprove the hypothesis.
>Researcher may try to further strengthen the research by modifying the experiment parameters in order to rule out other possibilities (eg. we should obscure the lighting above a maze to rule out the possibility that subjects are relying on that to navigate).
>Parameters of the experiment are chosen to be objectifiable (i.e. rigorously defined and testable, not some subjective thing that varies each time you run the experiment).
>Once the experiment is carried out, if one is able to find some statistically significant result then the research is published. Note: statistically significant doesn't necessarily mean there is a correlation, at times the significance is very small and it's possible it was just a fluke.
>Afterwards other researchers reproduce the experiments, possibly with variations, in an effort to disprove the hypothesis or expand on it.

(cont.)

(cont.)

In social science research:
>Researcher informs themselves of the popular ideologies in their field.
>Researcher plans an experiment based on other previous experiments in order to build said popular ideology.
>Said experiment is neither reproducible nor is there a firm hypothesis (the true hypothesis is unfalsifiable in the same way Marx Theory of History is).
>The experiment is built around subjective parameters, for instance the researcher may prepare questionnaires for the subjects that say:
What f̶u̶r̶s̶o̶n̶a̶ race do you feel like today? [ ] white [ ] black [ ] other
>At this point the experiment is carried out and the data and hypothesis are modified in order to fit a popular narrative (i.e. data is cherry picked or statistical methods are changed/cleverly chosen).

In many fraudulent cases the experiments are never even carried out.
nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html

This is all assuming the researcher even plans an experiment. Something else you'll see commonly is that a social scientist will cherry pick data about some big event that already happened and then use said data to form a hypothesis around it (eg. economists who study the market in retrospect).

You said it yourself: shitposting

There is no such thing as a valid shitpost, the only point is rile people up..

stapel was a die hard leftist btw.

that would be trolling

shitposting is any post that's low quality or pointless to the thread it appears in, regardless of whether it's intended to piss people off or not

It's about as valid as gender studies

Well it's also that high IQ people tend to have:
1. Higher education, which leads to
2. Higher income, which means they live in
3. Homes located in better neighborhoods (where the rich folk live)

All in all, high IQ people have far less incentive to commit crime because their needs are met through the normal social structure. Those that do commit crimes will commit "white collar" crime, like fraud. In reality these kinds of crimes are actually more harmful to overall society than your murder or rape, but they get less punishment, if any.

In the 2008 housing crisis there were people that straight up perpetrated fraud with regards to the credit ratings, exacerbating the already fucked situation to a massive shithurricane.

But, most of them got away with little more than a slap on the wrist. That one event probably did more damage to people than any series of murders, rapes or mass shootings in the past 3 decades.

Far more interesting and relevant would be statistics looking at ethnic crime rates of people in the same income class. If among all the poor people, crime rates are still higher for blacks and spics, then that's worth further inquiry.

The real problem with blacks is this retarded antagonism against police. If anything these poor black neighborhoods need MORE policing so that investment in these communities can actually begin. Otherwise they'll remain poor perpetually.

Social Science has crowds of die hard leftists and die hard rightists constantly fighting to push the narrative back and forth on a number of issues.

It's literally the most cancerous area of academia.

As valid as any other shitposting, i.e. invalid.

Also, your thread does not pertain to Veeky Forums, so I reported it. You're welcome.

Look at someone who has absolutely no idea about social sciences. I seriously wonder why you go out of your way to bullshit so hard lol I mean what could you possibly gain from this? Maybe you actually think you're rigth whatever.

I have actually worked in an institute for empirical sociology with a focus on survey methods / data science. People take their jobs and the scientific method really seriously, otherwise people would shit on them and no one would be able to publish shit. Yes fraud and cherry picking exists, but that is by no means limited to social sciences. It's been proven to occur in medicine as well for example. Just like the publication bias.

Look at yourself, you should be ashamed. Trying to feel superior by using the exact same processes you described. You're not making an objective statement, you have completely fallen in line with the confirmation bias. Good luck on your bachelor thesis if you ever get there.

>announcing reports
You're just asking for it at this point.

The issue isn't about validness of the shit posting but the lack of explanation when it comes to the "devil" in the details.

Yes, blacks seem to commit more crime in the U.S. but if we take into consideration that the sentences that they and others are given.

crimeinamerica.net/2010/01/25/crime-statistics-no-prison-sentences-for-most-felony-convictions/

crimeinamerica.net/2014/01/13/42-percent-of-felony-convictions-result-in-a-sentence-to-prison-33-percent-go-to-jail/

We find out they are arguably light enough to allow for release from prison and allowance of recidivism to occur. There is also the fact that recidivism appears to occur more often in african americans who are young.

dc.state.fl.us/pub/recidivism/2001/factors.html

Which is appears to be explained by the fact that the same demographic in question is affected by low socioeconomical areas and decrease job prospects before and after incarceration.

nij.gov/topics/corrections/reentry/pages/employment.aspx

Which will of course cause them to suffer recidivism again and go back to a system that has shown to favor profits in arguably ineffective rehabilitation programs.

dropoutprevention.org/engage/incarceration-within-american-and-nordic-prisons/

/pol/ is quick to post graphic statistics but those graphics say little on general nature behind the raw data being collected. I'm sure there's a correlation between IQ and crime since both are abstractions made by man and have faculties that tie to each other. But the correlation between race and crime is questionable since you are now implying the genome can code for man made abstractions in old and modern law and moral ethics which nine times out of ten they don't since law and ethics change all the time.

>pretending non-black crime is usually reported, let alone convicted in court

>bbut numbers don't lie xd

>guaranteedreplies.png

So nobody in this thread disputes the fact that blacks have a lower average IQ than other races?

Among the current human populations blacks do average on the lower end of the scale but they are certainly not the lowest as many attempt to go into hyperbole with. Also their average is in fact increasing in certain sub-populations which is good, cause some progress is better than none.

I'm smart and i got away with killing someone with a shotgun

>Driving back from work
>Decent day but turned shitty because i didn't get chosen for promotion
>Some asshole has been tailgating me for the past 2 miles
>I live in the country so the street is pitchblack
>I stop my car and the truck behind me stops
>He starts honking and i can hear him yelling some shit at me
>I have my shotgun with me and i notice he gets out
>this guy is shitface drunk and wants to pick a fight with me
>im fucking pissed off because he's a drunk driver and because of no promotion
>he's walking towards my car and i get out of mine with my 500
>and i just fucking shoot him once
>didn't rack my shotty so i wouldn't leave a shell behind
>get back in car and drive off and go home

Some anons won't believe this but oh well, just trying to tell you that smart people don't get caught, and i haven't been caught for that night.

Why the fuck are you posting anything from this cult leader piece of shit?

How do we stop blacks from committing crimes, then blame people with racism when people protest ?

Now you may, if someone decides to report this.

>Hello, 911, what is your emergency?
>Yeah hi, remember that guy that got shot out in the country at some point in the past? Yeah well, I know who did it, they posted on Veeky Forums
>Okay sir thank you for the tip we'll get right on that

>911 is the only form of reporting
underage b&

The key isn't stopping blacks from committing crimes but to induce lower recidivism rates which I suspect is the real core issue. If you can lower recidivism you can not only reduce crime committed by previous offenders but lower the risk of others being influence or imitating said offenders.

>shitpost

>Medicine is a hard science and totally not full of retards.
lol

The guy I posted is no mere exception. There have been many papers published recently detailing the ridiculous amount of social science research that goes unscruitinized with no attempt to reproduce studies.

What does it say about your field when a man can falsify research for years, accumulate a large number of citations and follow up studies, champion entire theories, etc.. all without anyone noticing or batting an eye.

All that aside, how can you put
>a molecular biology study that details a genome wide polygenic score used to describe some objective characteristic like education years among a group of UK students who were born between '94 and '96.
on the same level as
>a sociology study where people from downtown were given a questionnaire about which race they self identify and subjected to a simplified IQ test in order to determine a correlation between race and IQ.

Is that even a crime in most states? Isn't that self defense?

lol Americans...

>Molyneux
>/pol/
Times sure have changed, and so has the Molymeme