oh im not blaming anyone for doing so. just explaining why im not

since [1 - rate for one race] / [1 - rate for mixed race] was specified just for the home interview

i don't know what these numbers mean

seriously, looking up odds ratio to try and get all the context explains to me that they use (a/b) / (c/d) rather than (a*d)/(b*c) which is much easier

this is why i hated statistics

bunch of people trying to sound smart when really they just liked things being needlessly complicated

at some point ill just be able to ignore aussie franticly posting billions of images of bullshit without any context or reason for it without actually a legitament care if anyone actually looks at them (and he should know that no ones going to look at all that bullshit if he spams 40 pages of it at once) and then i wont have to waste my time anymore

well this is interesting, one is more likely to skip school more yet less like to repeat a grade....

ive noticed this is a trend for white nationalists

repeating a grade?

posting tons of images of shit they saw on 4chan reguardless of if anyone will talk to them about it or not and with complete indecency consitering they are always screen grabs of huge walls of text in great succession

there should be an internet rule against that

spamming is already an internet rule, but spamming images of textblocks is gay as fuck

"[a study] that assessed substance use and violent behaviors among 2,082 students in Seattle public middle schools"

what fucking middle schools needed that study? Seattle, get your drug addicted violent preteens under control

xD seattle is pretty fine from what i hear

though evergreen is there

"its worth noting anecdotally that..."

that anecdotes are not science? seriously.

so i supose that might be a problem

aah, well that study was in 2006 so

i guess we found out where all t he violent and drug addicted middle schoolers ended up from that study.

technically all science is anecdotal, just peer reveiwed

emperical evidence requires observation

its not anecdotal if you can replicate the test. If you are citing anecdotal evidence, it means YOU can't replicate the test.

unless were using 2nd hand sources in our scientific papers in which case fuck that shit

"Self-Identification of Race/Ethnicity, Race/ethnicity is a social construct and thus can be imprecise and unstable"

oops, guess that invalidates the study according to him. this is the Seattle one https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3292211/

they were asking 13yos "In the past year, how often did you use crack or cocaine?"

oh, and this is all survey data

13yo, answer these questions

and we are citing this for how adults do?

personally i woudlent go through the effert of arguing different case studys with someone about a topic as broad as race. if we cant even argue the spirit of the topic then theres no hope in finding ground on the nuances

i'm reading this because its funny as fuck

sure

this is what happens when you let scientists to their thing, they think asking kids these questions is not odd

there needs to be white nationalists rekt compolation videos

all this data is from like 1990s for a study done in 2006

made by people who actually know what rekt means mind you

oh hey, this is the table he was referencing

neat

"The hypothesis that a strong sense of ethnic identity is likely to decrease the probability of problem behaviors was supported for crack or cocaine initiation and the frequencies of substance use and violence. "....in 13 yos

13 yo smoking crack.

gotta add that to "This is America"