Terrified Academics Withdraw Study Showing White Cops Aren’t Killing More Blacks
(media.patriots.win)
posted ago by guitarmastershredder
+3939 / -0
Comments (183)
sorted by:
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES
•
Front
All
General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
They are admitting there's nothing wrong with their data or conclusions, they just don't like that it supports the right-wing view.
Science is dead.
Science died during the global warming debate when no one was allowed to ask questions.
Any 'science' that can't be questioned is not real science.
It was actually the second hand smoking debate IMO.
I mean, we've left most of our science's to our universities. Sadly, they have science throat at knifepoint.
Science became political before that, but this was the first issue where they could weaponize science by combining it with outright Karenism. Then they went to the climate change stuff and now it's masks and other crime statistics.
TBH most of the cutting edge stuff left for Europe/China years ago where they invest billions in CERN, ITER, and materials research. We invest billions into this bullshit. Without SpaceX and Blue Origin space race in the private sector the US would be massively behind in real-world tech development.
We have some apps where girls can show their tits, though.
That completely inaccurate.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180124113951.htm https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2019-08-08/us-returns-to-top-3-in-global-innovation-ranking
Proved my point.
Your own source confirms that the bulk of R&D comes from the private sector. What largely remains comes from the Fed is ineffective grant squatters and dwindling budget to fund actual progress.
Can you expound? I'm not up on the debate: Is there data contrary to the widely publicized "second hand smoking kills" mantra? Just curious. :)
There was never any real solid science behind it only a handful of anecdotal stories. Like a person who worked in an office or was married to a heavy smoker but never smoked and got lung cancer. Things like that where you aren't talking about a lot of people at all and you're also not controlling for other factors at all.
The whole thing was about emotion and not science. They started by vilifying smoking in general- putting a social stigma on "smokers." Then they rolled out the bans and taxes. Rinse and repeat with every other left wing issue since.
Oh, it is so, so much worse than just that.
Here is what Michael Crichton had to say about it in a "Aliens Cause Global Warming" a lecture he gave at Cal-Tech in 2003. The whole thing is fantastic and worth reading. If you ever read any "news" about "science", then you need to have read and understood this lecture, plus Feynman's Cargo Cult Science essay.
Good stuff. The activist EPA is one of the worst things about left wing politics because the language tricks and brain washing are so deeply entrenched. In reality the EPA should only be studying/testing based on established science as well as conducting clean up endeavors.
Obviously that would make them neutral and apolitical and the left and media can't have that.
All his books are very much worth reading. He was quite an interesting guy. I wish he were around to lead some investigations into climate “science”.
I'm going to say that there is about a 99% chance that It doesn't actually make you cough - you almost certainly trained yourself to cough at the sight of smoke at concentrations far below levels that actually irritate your respiratory system. If so, it would be simple enough to train yourself out of that habit, but who would do such a thing?
Thanks so much for this. Smoking literally killed many people in my family... but not the people that didn't smoke.
It's laughable this second hand smoke and my kids actually believe it. Of course, they didn't grow up in the 60s and 70s when the grocery check out lady was smoking. God everyone smoked but little kids.
It's ridiculous how we have vilified smokers. Nicotine is highly addictive. It was advertised like candy and even touted as healthy. People have no idea how alluring it was made to that generation. However, it's foolish to think your gonna get something form it being disbursed in the air. Sheesh. We'd all be dead.
I say this all the time... There's a big difference between pulling something directly into your lungs and trace amounts of something in the air. The proportion of smoke to cubic volume of air is a laughably nonexistent number.
Actually the second hand smoking crusade was another push to dramatically increase taxes on cigarettes. Same reason why they're trying to ban e-cigs.
It's always a way to squeeze more taxes out of the "undesirables," bonus if they are doing "damage to society" as well. Really with e-cigs though it's a question of not giving them an inch in the first place.
Whenever I see a truth.tv or whatever commercial about vaping it is just the most moronic "this is a gateway drug to real cigarettes" argument I just cringe.
Whatever. I really like being able to go out to eat and not smell like shit and smoke after sitting in a restaurant. Smoking sections and smokers were retarded anyway.
I believe in personal freedom and a society not run by emotional Karens who make unscientific claims. You acknowledge there were smoking and non-smoking sections- did you have a problem sitting in the non-smoking section, or are you just a cunty busy-boddy?
I'm open to businesses having the choice to cater to smokers if they wish, but there is no denying that your habit made everything smell disgusting.
I don't care if the science is weak. Public smoking laws address a nuisance, regardless of the health effects. They are similar to noise ordnances which prohibit loud music, and laws which prohibit discharge of firearms in urban areas.
Private businesses were forced to comply as well. I'm not sure what is a nuisance about smoking in a public place like the sidewalk, at least not compared to loud music or firing off a gun for no reason.
I find perfume and cologne to be a nuisance. In fact I even have a medical condition that can be effected by this. I also am disgusted by bad breath and body odor. Can I get laws against those things?
People who want to use the sidewalk or public place have to go out of their way to avoid you if they don't want to be annoyed by the smell of the smoke. You don't have a right to blast music in people's ears, just like you don't have a right to force others to be exposed to a terrible smell of smoke you can live without for a few minutes. Smoke in a private place or in a smoking area that keeps it away from others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGoZ-b1OaW4
Interesting stuff, thanks.
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness...
Can bad scientific practices be fixed? Part of the problem is that no-one is incentivised to be right. Instead, scientists are incentivised to be productive and innovative. The good news is that science is beginning to take some of its worst failings very seriously. The bad news is that nobody is ready to take the first step to clean up the system.”
-Richard Horton editor-in-chief of The Lancet
It is a dogma
Like HCQ studies, or the real impacts of lockdowns?
Science is dead. Journalism is dead. Schooling is dead. Family’s are dead. Community is dead. Everything the left touches dies. Good thing they stay out of the military. That may be the only thing that can save us...
Why do you think they haven't infested the military? I'm in the Canadian Armed Forces. It's infested. So is the US military. Have you not seen pictures of US military members wearing masks? Do you think 0 leftists and democrats join the military? Lt. Col. Vindman is an example of a traitor in the US military. Both the US and Canadian military pay for tranny genital surgery. I can't remember how long ago it is that the US took out the grenade throwing part of the basic training course because women couldn't pass it.
No institution is immune. I wasn’t implying that. But seems like the military is the most likely candidate to save our republic.
canapeder was right, they've definitely infested the military bigly. they're all over the place because of how many benefits the military offers, hell the president had to ban trannies from being able to serve because they were just using the military to pay for their genital mutilation
for a long time even though parts like the intelligence branches were infested with marxist mindrot, the infantry and other combat roles were based. why do you think obama pushed so hard to get women into the combat roles? in spite of everything they told us wasn't going to happen, what's the first thing they did after that? lower the standards required so that women could pass and be infantrypersons
you look at this bullshit long enough you start to see the same patterns emerge. the final redpill is when you see a certain group always being responsible for it.
Oy vey....
once you can decipher this image you will know
Can I get a hint, this flew over my head.
Don’t forget that jackass that was wearing the Che shirt under his West Point uniform.
https://media.arkansasonline.com/img/photos/2018/06/20/186984383_186983410-d18fc6e5deea4cc797ba8623aded037a_t800.jpg?90232451fbcadccc64a17de7521d859a8f88077d
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44538404
He got booted, but you have to think there are more who were smarter about keeping it under the radar.
Then there was 8 years of Obama promoting generals/admirals primarily on the basis of political correctness.
When I was in sexual harassment training in middle school, I asked the principal how long you could stare at a girl before it became harassment and this dipshit said point blank “9 seconds.” So we had a school full of kids sitting in class counting “one thousand one, one thousand two...” It was pretty awesome.
Were you still in when they were seriously considering deploying trannies? That's when I knew these fucks had infiltrated deeper than I realized.
Not to mention 80% of females enlisted/commissioned are your typical danger hair without the actual hair dye.
Can't answer for OP, but I was. It was when I also realized I was not going to reenlist. When a male can use the female's latrines and shower facilities because they identify as female (or vice versa) and have "begun the process," I was out.
Couldn't agree more about the females, too. I was highly disappointed. Not to mention most of them were raging whores the likes of which I had never seen before. It was very difficult finding fellow females that just wanted to serve their country and do their job.
the biggest red pill possible is to talk to medics and corpsmen about their experiences helping people out with new and exciting forms of VD that defy medical science
somehow all their stories seem to start out the same way. and, well, they kinda end the same too.
The military was my biggest redpill into how little loyalty people hold for each other, unfortunately.
There were definitely good things, but the human nature I saw my "brothers and sisters" display was eye opening. It wasn't the least bit surprising when that poor girl was found murdered at Ft. Hood.
Same. I found some of the best people in my life in the military, but I also found some of the worst.
It also showed me what an absolute fucking disaster government-run healthcare would be.
On no, they've definitely already infiltrated our military. A good percentage of officers and POGs (person other than grunt) are liberal cucks. They've been destroying the institution for years, unfortunately. And they're very good at driving the good ones out so all the ranks are filled with subpar pussy leadership that taints the next generation of soldiers.
I argued this point with a lefty the other day. I asked for where his data was coming from to prove the cops were systematically hunting blacks.
People really believe this shit!
We don't need studies on this. The FBI statistics is open to the public. 16 unarmed blacks died to cops last year. SIXTEEN. The rest were all armed and dangerous. The biggest issue here is blacks perpetrating violent crime constantly.
Even that 16 is bullshit. Just because someone is unarmed doesn't mean the police shot them in the back of the head execution style. You can attack the police with your bare hands or a car, which is what most of them were doing
Michael Brown is the poster boy of this. His DNA was on the slide of Darren Wilson’s pistol - he was trying to get the gun away from Officer Wilson.
Which is exactly why I asked where these numbers are. I know they don’t exist.
They believe it because it’s what their DNC media tells them this and ignores actual reality.
If anything, police are SCARED to do anything to a black person. They know that a single wrong move can send them straight to prison.
As someone who was on his way to a successful career in the sciences and left due to the cucks, science is one of the least reliable things out there. The only good thing about it is that the 3% that is right is revolutionary.
If the party of science trots out Bill Nye as one of their heavy hitters you know they're not serious.
Even Neil deGrasse Tyson is a lightweight compared to the old dead guys.
They’re the scientism evangelists. Telling us to put faith in science. That science has all the answers.
Except science never has and never will provide answers. It can only produce models, the interpretation of which may or may not be useful.
Models which are often confirmation-biased by the scientist’s preconceived notions, often drilled into them by leftist indoctrination in schools.
Honestly thought it was. Scary and sad that it isn't.
2019 study https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877?utm_source=TrendMD&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Proc_Natl_Acad_Sci_U_S_A_TrendMD_0
2020 retraction for 2019 study https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/07/09/2014148117
Archive this
Archived 2019 study: http://archive.is/UpT6I
Good move.
I read the retraction which linked to the journal post refuting the article. They weren’t refuting it on political grounds, the problem was the math used in the original study was just wrong and didn’t support the conclusion made.
Here’s the paper refuting the original study: https://www.pnas.org/content/117/3/1261.full
Politics aside, the math was just bad.
Looks like a pretty good refutation.
At this point, I don’t trust any of these people unless they’re doing some hardcore physics 5 sigma stuff. The others don’t seem to have a clue how statistics work.
Now let’s wait for them to do similar refutations of leftist science.
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877
Archive!
Your wish is my command:
https://archive.is/J1IrR
Thank you!
I downloaded the pdf version onto my phone. Everyone do it before it miraculously disappears.
The link above includes a PDF download of the study - link to that PDF is here for convenience
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/116/32/15877.full.pdf
[spez: below -> above]
Science Gud. Unless it doesn't support my opinions. You could cry so hard you'd almost laugh.
haha
if anyone's interested here's another breakdown of stats I've been shoving down leftists throats
Thanks :-)
Link to actual article.
Oh hey, I almost forgot about that video where the cop murdered a white guy for being outside.
White cops are terrified of using any amount of justified force against violent black criminals because of the threat of rioting and losing their jobs and lives. It's a state of pseudo-lawlessness. Black criminals are the least policed segment of the entire US population.
All anyone has to do is watch the Rayshard Brooks bodycam footage. They could have put him in a headlock at least once. But they didn’t, because apparently in a fight for your life a headlock isn’t allowed, at least according to Democrats.
In 2019, two Liberal academics found that there was no racial bias in police shootings - unarmed Blacks and Whites were equally as likely to be shot by police. When Heather MacDonald cited their work in an essay last month, the researchers "disavowed" their own work, because it didn't fit with the narrative of the George Floyd killings.
There's an EXCELLENT response to the retraction by MacDonald in the Wall Street Journal. Link: https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-cited-their-study-so-they-disavowed-it-11594250254?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=7
I’ve been in love with her for years. I recommended her book The War on Cops to our police chief when it came out a few years ago.
Pathetic cowards. The world is literally going to shit. Facts and science are suppressed in favor of ideology.
Gutless. Truly gutless. Withdraw facts because they no longer fit the narrative.
Depending on whether you believe 1984 was a warning or foreshadowing, Orwell is either rolling or laughing in his grave.
Either way, this is not good for the people... Fingers crossed for a Streisand Effect
The truth will make you fear.
I would think an academic would have a little more backbone when it came to facing down the outrage mob. I guess not
Which sucks because "college prof" was one of my favored career paths. I really enjoyed teaching when I effectively replaced a prof for his MBA-level Data Analytics (and other times when I've tutored before that). The juice isn't worth the squeeze, though, if I get cancelled because I dare to go against the leftist worldview.
They are not what you think they are. They are highly controlled pawns. They are terrorized by their institutions and highly obnoxious peers. They have both an inferiority complex AND a superiority complex. They feel superior because their title and the myths associated with it, but they feel inferior because they know they are living a lie. They aren't the smartest and most enlightened people, they are the most submissive and manageable.
I know this world pretty well, and in my experience, academics have huge egos and tend to dig in when they think they are right rather than acquiesce. It's really not a line of work that sheeple get into.
University intellectuals are the biggest sheeple there are. They rebel along approved paths of rebellion. When their positions are put at risk, they bow down.
"the party of science" riots until science they don't like is changed to fit their fantasy, again, as usual
The irony of this finding is that it should be considered good news whether you're black or you hate white people - hooray, they are killing more whites than blacks!
Hard to be the hero when you're always the victim.
Reality has a conservative bias.
Reality is racist.
But the data set is still available. Any competent researcher will come up with the same conclusions given the same data.
What if Leftards in the sciences realize that they can suppress the data? They'll censor the data and only collect data that fit the narrative.
Wait, they already did that to push the Climate Change Bullshit.
It’s so easy to figure it out. You should read the study, someone linked it. I could have figured it out with some drinking buddies and a joint
That's why most of Europe doesn't report criminal race data
Original Article Archived: https://archive.is/Ouqz0
“they don’t gotta burn the books, they just remove them”
Irony.
Which side is anti science again?
Lefties: "BURN THE BOOKS FASTER!"
Black on black murder is just late term abortions, fully sanctioned by the (D)communist, black lies matter, and PPP.
Does nobody have a backbone anymore? Fucking cowards
They're afraid someone will make angry Tweets about them.
That's literally all it comes down to
Withdraw study. That's the Marxist playbook right there.
We need to create alternative institutions.
Terrified Academics Withdraw Study Showing White Cops Aren’t Killing More Blacks.
–mykillk 308 points They are admitting there's nothing wrong with their data or conclusions, they just don't like that it supports the right-wing view.
Science is dead. https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/07/09/terrified-academics-withdraw-study-showing-white-cops-arent-killing-more-blacks-n624928
What they're saying, in the correction, is that they missed the difference between P(race.suspect | shot, race.officer) and P(shot | race.suspect, race.officer). They've established that the value of the first doesn't change as race.officer changes between White <-> non-White. How about actually taking a look at possible implications instead of just retracting?
Call race.suspect 'A', shot 'B' and race.officer 'C'. These two formulas are then P(A|B,C) and P(B|A,C). By Bayes rule and the product rule, P(A|B,C)=P(B|A,C)*P(A|C)/P(B|C)
So in order for P(B|A,C) to contain a masked dependence on C, if the value goes up when C changes non-White -> White, the ratio P(A|C)/P(B|C) would have to go down by a similar factor; then there is no overall change in the value of P(A|B,C). So, some combination of (i) White officers are more likely to shoot, regardless of the suspect's race, and (ii) White officers avoid confrontation with non-White suspects.
(i) Wouldn't be a racist issue. (ii) might be true, in the sense that White officers don't work in those neighbourhoods as much. Well, just redo the analysis and disregard rural areas then. If it remains true that White officers avoid, e g, checking broken tail lights if the suspect is a minority that would contradict common narratives pretty strikingly.
George Orwell 1984 is right now......
I briefly laughed because I thought this was a shitpost from Babylon Bee or something.
*sigh*
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/07/09/terrified-academics-withdraw-study-showing-white-cops-arent-killing-more-blacks-n624928
How the fuck do you withdraw science?!?
Now, I have worked with scientists, and I know what fucking prima donna's many can be. Good scientists are just good grant writers/politicians
They either can't do honest research or they don't want to. I think k they're liars.
Correction for “Officer characteristics and racial disparities in fatal officer-involved shootings,” by David J. Johnson, Trevor Tress, Nicole Burkel, Carley Taylor, and Joseph Cesario, which was first published July 22, 2019
The authors wish to note the following: “Recently, we published a report showing that, among civilians fatally shot, officer race did not predict civilian race and there was no evidence of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparities (1). Specifically, we estimated the probability that a civilian was Black, Hispanic, or White given that a person was fatally shot and some covariates. The dataset contains only information about individuals fatally shot by police, and the race of the individual is predicted by a set of variables. Thus, we compute Pr(racejshot, X) where X is a set of variables including officer race.
“Although we were clear about the quantity we estimated and provide justification for calculating Pr(racejshot, X) in our report (see also 2, 3), we want to correct a sentence in our significance statement that has been quoted by others stating ‘White officers are not more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-White officers.’ This sentence refers to estimating Pr(shotjrace, X). As we estimated Pr(racejshot, X), this sentence should read: ‘As the proportion of White officers in a fatal officer-involved shooting increased, a person fatally shot was not more likely to be of a racial minority.’ This is consistent with our framing of the results in the abstract and main text.
“We appreciate the feedback that led us to clarify this sentence (4). To be clear, this issue does not invalidate the findings with regards to Pr(racejshot, X) discussed in the report.”
Fucking bastards. Black Lives matters is pushing a HOAX!
I guess it was a misfire ;)
Liberals do this to everyone and everything. They have a narrative to push and they make sure it's the ONLY narrative out there.
If you talk about anything scientific, they always btalk about the scientific COMMUNITY! Science isn't a community, it's facts, it's data. If 100 people say that the world is a marshmallow, and 1 guy doesn't. Does that make the world a marshmallow? Hell NO!
They also use tactics that are very unscientific. Like stomping their feet snd saying 'It's settled science!' No, science is NEVER settled. The wold being flat was 'settled science' till evidence of the opposite being true. The earth was the center of the universe was 'settled science' until it was found thstbit wasn't.
They also use money to get people to lean their way. 'investigate this and find my way to be true ir I'll cut you off'
They flood the system with their 'scientific papers' The whole 97% of all scientists lie came from there being a flood of left leaning papers published and pushed as science. Well it's easy to claim victory when you own all the magazines that publish them and you only let what YOU want into those papers. This is not science either.
They also scare tactics. They threaten to humiliate you if you are a scientist, or ostracize you from 'the community' if you say ANYTHING against them. No matter the evidence you have aquired they will not care and will laugh you into obscurity.
None of these tactics they use are scientific at all, they are bully tactics at best.
This is why I stand with the people and not the communities.
hands up, don't shoot lmao
They call this, 'progress.'
Electronic book burning... The knowledge offends some, and so it must be burned!
Here's the study, https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877 get it while you can.
The Ministry of Truth is super belly unfeel this wrong speak.
You can still download the study from sci-hub.tw although it will probably get cancel-cultured at some point.
https://sci-hub.tw/10.1073/pnas.1903856116
Direct link:
https://dacemirror.sci-hub.tw/journal-article/dcb7141a09eb1b9e613157026d305d98/johnson2019.pdf