Mathematical/logical validity is not based on a popular vote, thank goodness. But how sad that a moderator on the SDMB of all places is advocating that it should be! I guess this place really is going to shit.
No, this is what EE (and GIGO) would like to shift the emphasis to. But the fundamental error was logical/mathematical, and is erroneous regardless of what the figures are in empirical reality. See post 942, which I linked for Miller just above.
…well thank fuck. You finally seem to have run out of words. Does this you are going to do us all a big fucking favour and shut-the-fuck-up?
Prove it. I’ve just checked my facebook feed, just as you suggested, and no Sarah Jeong is not driving the liberal agenda.
No they fucking aren’t.
Says the guy who cited his personal facebook feed.
:: looks around ::
No you can’t make that case. The President of the United States of America tells an average of 5 lies a day. And the conservatives that support the president are fine with that. You can’t point to anybody that pushes “the liberal agenda” that comes close to spinning the weave of lies and propaganda that the conservatives are pushing at this very moment in time.
Fuck that shit. And fuck you.
:: looks around ::
We’ve got a centre-left coalition government, one third of which is a progressive green party. We have our third woman prime-minster, only the second current-generation-world-leader to give birth while in office, and she just had six-weeks-off-work with paid parental leave. We had a couple of alt-right provocateurs try to give a speech in this country a couple of months ago but they couldn’t: because no venue would allow them to speak there. We drove the fuckers off.
So we won’t allow a fascist regime to blossom in our country.
And we won’t allow it because we speak up against it and we fight against it and we don’t allow it and we don’t tolerate it.
Because that is how its supposed to work. If you are voting for the white supremacists its because you think the white supremacists have something to offer you. You have to fight. You cannot yield. And telling people to “shut up” is telling people to stand back and to let the fascists bloom.
I’m doing fine thanks. Not going to hell, not dragging you to hell.
So…that was your weird roid-ragey-aggro way of saying “sorry, when I said we agreed to treat SpEd funding as equal, I meant federal only”? Mmmkay. There are still problems with that, but I will let it slide because I’m not trying to let you distract from how deeply your innumeracy was exposed in post #942.
So, I take it that you do believe that Velikowski was right?
Really, as pointed before, your logic/math can work in lalaland; but the bottom line is that in the USA there are many districts that are short-changing large percentages of low-income and minority students. So logic tell us that the numbers you are plugging are that: fantasy, or that it misleads by concentrating on specific areas of funding that were not the main issue. Your logic does work in fiction, but not for the issue at hand.
You started this distraction in the other thread by implying that minorities got the same funding, well that is not really the case. And so the other implication from Murray and their ilk, that genes explain the gap in student performance better, was also undermined.
I guess that just like Velikowski it is more beautiful to add numbers that in the end are not the main issue, but what was important to Velikowski was that his numbers showed that planets could do what he wanted. But the real numbers, that describe how the orbits and matter of the planets actually behave, show how foolish is to maintain that course.
Now your turn. Admit error for one of the following:
This one, where you misunderstand my post about how you frequently misunderstand people’s posts
Or this one, where you fail to convert a word problem into a math equation while claiming that I don’t understand how to convert word problems into math equations.
Those are both great posts, by the way. The one where you misunderstand my post about how you frequently misunderstand people’s posts is just a wonderful display of retardation.
Uh huh. Once again you have failed to link to my post where this supposed “error” exists. Gosh, I wonder why…oh, I know, it’s because you went back and looked at it, realized I didn’t actually make a mistake, and you’re too embarrassed to admit it. Prove me wrong–go back to the post where I made my supposed “error”, and cite the so-called error.
Let’s be honest with each other–you’re not going to do it. Because you know you’re wrong, and actually citing my post will demonstrate your extended stupidity. And now you’re in so deep that you can’t back down. Sad.
No, post 948was me making fun of you for making an incredibly stupid math error in a post where you thought you’d caught me making a math error.
And not just any math error: the exact same math error you’ve been making since April. The one that people have been explaining to you for literally months. Literally.
If it were a play it would be called “The Severely Retarded Message-board Poster”:
*ENTER SCENE*
EE: [EE thinks he's having a conversation with a person of normal intellect]: I say, if black schoolchildren receive less per capita funding than white schoolchildren, and then you give an equal amount of SpEd funding to all SpEd students, then black SpEd students will be receiving less funding than white SpEd students.
Slacker [Slacker is severely retarded]: I have you sir! You earlier claimed that all SpEd students received the same amount of SpEd funding. But now you are claiming that black SpEd students receive less funding than white SpEd students! This is a contradiction. You have made an error! You don't understand math! or averages!
EE: By Jove, I suspect you may be severely retarded.
.....[7 MONTHS PASS]......
EE: Remember that conversation we had 7 months ago? Now that you have had time to think on it I think you will agree that, given the facts, black SpEd students receive less funding than white SpEd students.
Slacker [Slacker is still, unsurprisingly, severely retarded]: Ah ha!, I have caught you in a math error! You earlier claimed that all SpEd students received the same amount of SpEd funding. But now you are claiming that black SpEd students receive less funding than white SpEd students! This is a contradiction. You have made an error! You don't understand math! or averages!
EE [EE is desperately looking for an exit]
Slacker [Yep, still severely retarded]: Math error! Doesn't understand averages! My doorknob has become stuck in my anus!
[AND END SCENE]
It’s not so much Sarah Jeong herself that worries me, it’s the left’s response to the Sarah Jeong controversy. The left wing media has circled the wagons to defend Jeong’s right to viciously bash white people. But when James Damore, a white man at Google writes a politely worded and well reasoned memo critiquing Google’s diversity policies, he’s fired from his job. The left wing media cackles with glee. Blatant hypocrisy and double standards bother me. This is a canary in the coal mine moment for me. An early warning sign of danger that we ignore at our peril.
If progressive culture doesn’t welcome white people, and actively repels them, that will lead to Republicans winning. I rely on the Affordable Care Act to afford health insurance. I’m white. That will make my life harder.
The truth of the second sentence does not prove the truth of the first. “In spite of” is a phrase that fits IMO. Plus it’s not white progressives we risk losing but white moderates.
That’s exactly my point. If you depend on the Affordable Care Act, then if you vote Republican because a person was mean to you on Twitter, you DESERVE to lose your health insurance.
That doesn’t scan. Just because Blalron depends on Obamacare, that doesn’t mean the swing voters we worry about necessarily do. I would bet serious money a lot of my wife’s married, middle-aged white male colleagues who teach at the same high school she does fall into this category. And they have the same, fairly decent health plan she has for our whole family.
I grew up in a family that loved Arlo Guthrie, but it’s not that unreasonable to take the other interpretation given that the titular character of the film “Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore” and the hit TV adaptation “Alice” worked at Mel’s diner.
Sure it does. If Blalron depends on Obamacare, and votes for the party who wants to repeal Obamacare, then he is an idiot. Blaming mean people on Twitter for your own idiocy is moronic.
Not unreasonable? After naming the artist, including a direct quotation from the song, and referencing the Vietnam War?
Sure, ok. Perhaps not unreasonable. Just ignorant and unwilling–or unable–to read for context.
Which, now that I consider it, certainly appears to be the real subject of this thread.
.
