maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Sat Aug 19, 2017 12:45 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


It's the Gulag of Fun



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:43 pm 
Offline
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 8497
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 9548
nero wrote:
Is eugenics science? :roll:

So it goes.


Racism that made use of some science.

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Sat Feb 22, 2014 12:13 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 25388
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 13998
nero wrote:
chijohnaok wrote:


So were the scientists that supported eugenics in the early 20th century also left leaning?

Is eugenics science? :roll:

So it goes.


It was considered a science by some (and I don't just mean the sorts of crackpots that you often refer to).

Quote:
Eugenics became an academic discipline at many colleges and universities, and received funding from many sources.[13] Three International Eugenics Conferences presented a global venue for eugenists with meetings in 1912 in London, and in 1921 and 1932 in New York. Eugenic policies were first implemented in the early 1900s in the United States.[14] Later, in the 1920s and 30s, the eugenic policy of sterilizing certain mental patients was implemented in other countries, including Belgium,[15] Brazil,[16] Canada,[17] and Sweden.[18] The scientific reputation of eugenics started to decline in the 1930s, a time when Ernst Rüdin used eugenics as a justification for the racial policies of Nazi Germany. Nevertheless, in Sweden the eugenics program continued until 1975.[18]
In addition to being practiced in a number of countries, eugenics was internationally organized through the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations.[19] Its scientific aspects were carried on through research bodies such as the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics,[20] the Cold Spring Harbour Carnegie Institution for Experimental Evolution, [21] and the Eugenics Record Office.[22] Its political aspects involved advocating laws allowing the pursuit of eugenic objectives, such as sterilization laws.[23] Its moral aspects included rejection of the doctrine that all human beings are born equal, and redefining morality purely in terms of genetic fitness.[24] Its racist elements included pursuit of a pure "Nordic race" or "Aryan" genetic pool and the eventual elimination of "less fit" races.[25][26]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics#History

Some of these early eugenists include Karl Pearson and Walter Weldon, who worked on this at the University College, London.

At its peak of popularity, eugenics was supported by a wide variety of prominent people, including Winston Churchill,[68] Margaret Sanger,[69][70] Marie Stopes, H. G. Wells, Norman Haire, Havelock Ellis, Theodore Roosevelt, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, John Harvey Kellogg, Linus Pauling[71] and Sidney Webb.





Three International Eugenics Congresses took place between 1912 and 1932 and were the global venue for scientists, politicians, and social leaders to plan and discuss the application of programs to improve human heredity in the early twentieth century.

New York Times article on the first conference:
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-fr ... 946396D6CF

A publication covering the third conference:
https://archive.org/details/decadeofprogress00inte

pdf version:
https://ia700402.us.archive.org/2/items ... 00inte.pdf

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Sat Feb 22, 2014 2:01 am 
Offline
Honorary Texan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:11 am
Posts: 9296
Location: Hole-in-the-Wall
Reputation points: 7273
Quote:
There is no ideology in science, only science.

What a naive moron. The climateers are forever trying to hide their "research" from other scientists. They are petrified of peer review from an unbiased viewpoint.

Ever hear of Climategate?

Everytime a paper by the climateers has been up for peer review its been demolished.

Image

Would you buy a used car from this man?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Mon Feb 24, 2014 1:07 am 
Offline
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 8497
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 9548
Since this thread isn't getting much Finnish love, a compilation of the best newsbloopers. I laughed till i cried.




*****fixed it for ya - dawg

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2015 2:24 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 25388
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 13998
First saw this article posted at Civfanatics.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morn ... se-enough/


Quote:
S.F. middle school delays election results because winners not diverse enough

By Michael E. Miller October 20

On Oct. 6, Everett Middle School welcomed a special visitor. As students cheered and clapped, Chelsea Clinton walked across the San Francisco academy’s wooden stage and hugged Everett’s mascot, a humongous brown and white owl.

Clinton was at Everett to promote a book, but when she learned that the public school was about to hold its first student council election in several years, the former first daughter couldn’t help but chime in with words of encouragement.

“I don’t think anyone should ever rule out politics as a way to make a difference,” she said, according to ABC 7.

If students were inspired, however, it didn’t last long.

When Everett held its election three days later, its principal promptly refused to release the results, saying she was concerned that the winners were not diverse enough.

While she would ultimately relent and release the results, her decision spurred anger among parents and kids who felt that the principal was putting diversity ahead of democracy. Critics compared her to a dictator who scraps elections when results don’t go her way. It was the middle school equivalent of hanging chads and a near political crisis, only without a Supreme Court to hear the case.

What was supposed to be a civics lesson had quickly devolved into chaos.

“The whole school voted for those people, so it is not like people rigged the game,” seventh-grader Sebastian Kaplan told KRON 4, who had run for class representative yet had no clue a week later if he won. “But in a way, now it is kinda being rigged.”




The controversy began as soon as the Oct. 9 election results rolled in. Everett’s 36-year-old principal, Lena Van Haren, was disturbed by the lack of diversity among the winners, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

The school sits in San Francisco’s Mission District, a historically diverse neighborhood that has recently struggled with both gentrification and gang violence. Everett is as much a melting pot as the community, with 80 percent of its population comprised of students of color. Only 20 percent of students are white, Van Haren told KTVU.


The results of the election, however, gave the principal pause.

Literally.

Students weren’t exactly expecting real-time streaming results, but they were surprised not to learn who had won when they showed up to school the following Monday. By Wednesday, the situation was getting weird.

On Thursday, nearly a week after the election, Van Haren sent out an e-mail to parents explaining her decision to withhold the election results.

“This is complex, but as a parent and a principal, I truly believe it behooves us to be thoughtful about our next steps here so that we can have a diverse student council that is truly representative of all voices at Everett,” she wrote, according to the Chronicle. Van Haren then suggested the school “add positions” to improve diversity, KTVU reported.


And that’s when the civics hit the fan.

Students who had run for office were left in limbo, wondering if they had won or lost and if it even mattered anymore. Parents were equally confused. Eventually, that confusion turned into annoyance, then anger.

“I wanted to get more involved and change some things,” Kaplan, the seventh-grader running for class representative, told KRON 4, practically quoting Chelsea Clinton verbatim. “I feel like it is disrespectful to all the people who were running,” he said of the strange silence over election results.

Parents turned to local media to claim that political correctness had trumped common sense — not to mention democracy.

“My criticism of the Everett administration is their good intention got in the way of their common sense,” parent Todd David told the Chronicle. “It’s really, really disturbing to me that withholding the results somehow equals social justice or equity. That is where I totally disconnect. I’m like, ‘Whoa.’ ”

Others said that diversity is all fine and good, but it should have been addressed before the election, not afterward in an ad hoc manner.

“That should have been something [discussed] prior to elections and prior to the campaigning process,” another Everett parent, Bianca Gutierrez, told KTVU.

The irony that a middle school student election had turned into a political quagmire worthy of Congress wasn’t lost on anyone.

“If we can’t teach them the right way it’s supposed to work, then we are really just letting our kids down,” Gutierrez said. “My heart goes out to the kids because they’re confused still about the issue.”

If the story upset students and parents in the Mission District, it soon spread to the rest of San Francisco, and beyond.

“Well, the children’s voices were heard. They just seemed to be less obsessed with race than some administrators are,” wrote UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh, in his blog Volokh Conspiracy hosted by The Washington Post.

In the echo chamber of the Internet, the Everett Middle School student body election quickly became twisted into the latest salvo in America’s culture war.

“San Fran Middle School Cancels Student Elections Because Too Many White People Elected,” ran a factually incorrect headline on the conservative Web site the Daily Caller.

“Middle School Principal Blocks Student Election Results After Not Enough Minorities Win,” read a slightly less mistaken headline in Mediaite.

In the comments section of local media, critics demanded Van Haren’s resignation. Some ominously quoted George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984.” Others compared her to a slew of strongmen.

“I’m sure Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and Napoleon did the same in the name of some bulls— excuse,” another wrote.

Amid the hyperbole, however, there was a genuine, general concern that the principal’s decision to sit on the election results was not the most democratic example.

“So it’s more important to be ‘diverse’ than democratic,” one commenter wrote sarcastically. “Good to know.”

“You do not get to negate … democratic election results because you would have preferred them to be different,” another echoed.

“Kids chose based on popularity,” added a third. “Can the PC diversity crap.”

On Monday, as news of Everett’s election went national, Van Haren ultimately gave in, going from class to class and announcing the election results.

“While there was some diversity among the 10 winners, no English learners were elected, even though they make up about a third of enrollment,” the Chronicle reported. “African American and Latino students were underrepresented, while white, Asian and mixed-race students, who are in the minority at the school, took the top four spots.”


Van Haren also announced on Monday that she never had any intention of nullifying the election results.

“We paused to have a conversation,” she told the Chronicle. “I never, ever said we wouldn’t share the results or they weren’t good enough.

“This is middle school. It’s not a presidential election,” Van Haren added. “It was not about hurting democracy or putting diversity over democracy.”

Yet, some parents said the principal had done just that, and instead of introducing her students to democracy had underlined the gulf between Everett’s election and the real thing.

“The thing that’s so frustrating to me, as a parent and an engaged citizen, is you release the results and then you form committees,” David told the Chronicle. “How can you say, ‘In the name of social justice, we’re going to withhold election results’?”


Van Haren declined to comment to The Post when reached by phone on Monday night. But she hasn’t backed down from her belief that a diverse population should translate to equally diverse representatives.

“It’s not okay for a school that is really, really diverse to have the student representatives majority white,” she told the Chronicle. “The easy thing would have been to announce the results and move on. I intentionally did not choose the easy way because this is so important.”

Some parents supported her, pointing out that Van Haren was struggling with the same societal problems that produce a Congress that is 80 percent white and 80 percent male in a country that is more than 50 percent female and 38 percent non-white (including Hispanics).

[The new Congress is 80 percent white, 80 percent male and 92 percent Christian]

“Here we are in a school and the same thing happens,” Melissa Daar Carvajal, who has two sons at Everett, told the Chronicle. “They’re living in the real world at Everett.”

Van Haren did admit, however, that she could have handled the controversy better by announcing the election results right away.

“I could never have predicted things would get to this point,” she told the Chronicle, adding that she hoped the civics lesson gone wrong could still be “a teachable moment.”


Michael E. Miller is a foreign affairs reporter for The Washington Post. He writes for the Morning Mix news blog. Tweet him: @MikeMillerDC


So what exactly happened here?

[Continued below due to length....Posting limit still too short Doggie.}

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2015 2:25 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 25388
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 13998
You can't blame the outcome on gerrymandering.
You can't blame the outcome on voter registrations or requiring voter IDs.
Did the white kids that won in an undrepresentative proportion use their wealth (or their parent's wealth) to buy the election?

Every student in the school voted, but the principal didn't like the outcome so she decided "to take a pause" and consider adding more positions (to what--dilute the results of the vote?).

In my experience, school elections were rarely over a platform. They were generally more of a popularity contest, or a name recognition thing.

That this happened in San Francisco shouldn't surprise anyone.

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:22 pm 
Offline
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 8497
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 9548
What a dumb bitch.

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 5:59 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 25388
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 13998
Google wants to promote diversity within its workforce........fires an employee who had an opinion that differed.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-goog ... SKBN1AO1WY


_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:52 am 
Offline
His Most Gracious Majesty, Commie of the Year
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 6692
Reputation points: 13223
nero wrote:
There is no ideology in science, only science.

So it goes.


This is incorrect. Sociology studies begin with a number of books, one of them analyzing and listing "academic tribes", how academiacs identify to these various tribes, how these tribes differ from each other and what sort of internal beliefs, values and such they have.

In fact history of scientific discovery has a number of stories where the revolutionary young scientist has to go against the prejudice of the 'old fart cadre' who are fighting to oppose the stupid upstart and his or her foolish ideas.

World of academic research also involves epic amounts of internal politics, favoritism and ass kissing. There are 'gold piggy clubs' within academia and certain opening positions can be reserved for members of clubs - or academic tribes.

In sociology we view these things as normal human behavior, something to expect.

Luckily once you get your papers and research out and if it has merits you have a good chance of being taken serious.. Or not.

Because the research on phagues - bacteria killing phagues - was initially strong in Soviet Union an early Western scientist working on them received such passionate mauling and scorn from a notorious authority within academia who loathed communists and linked his loathing to the phague research that the whole field of research became considered as 'debunked' in West for decades, stalling all research into the field because of politics, in this case the political opinions, prejudices and scorns of one highly respected figurehead member of academia.

_________________
All scientists across the world work for US Democratic Party


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: American Diversity
PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:46 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 12309
Reputation points: 2601
Kameolontti wrote:
nero wrote:
There is no ideology in science, only science.

So it goes.


This is incorrect. Sociology studies begin with a number of books, one of them analyzing and listing "academic tribes", how academiacs identify to these various tribes, how these tribes differ from each other and what sort of internal beliefs, values and such they have.

In fact history of scientific discovery has a number of stories where the revolutionary young scientist has to go against the prejudice of the 'old fart cadre' who are fighting to oppose the stupid upstart and his or her foolish ideas.

World of academic research also involves epic amounts of internal politics, favoritism and ass kissing. There are 'gold piggy clubs' within academia and certain opening positions can be reserved for members of clubs - or academic tribes.

In sociology we view these things as normal human behavior, something to expect.

Luckily once you get your papers and research out and if it has merits you have a good chance of being taken serious.. Or not.

Because the research on phagues - bacteria killing phagues - was initially strong in Soviet Union an early Western scientist working on them received such passionate mauling and scorn from a notorious authority within academia who loathed communists and linked his loathing to the phague research that the whole field of research became considered as 'debunked' in West for decades, stalling all research into the field because of politics, in this case the political opinions, prejudices and scorns of one highly respected figurehead member of academia.

Sociology is no science, history is no science...

If you have the strict definition of science. Physics is the science of sciences, I have my doubts about chemistry and biology is even more doubtful.

Mathematics is no science, but goes into the same category with logic as tools for science and human thinking.

But interestingly enough some politically corrupted studies like Lysenkos' theory. Now the are advances in epigenetics.

Ja on aina tarpeellista muistaa mutiaiset jotka elävät satiasten munakarvoissa . Finnish proverb.

Nähdään, jossei sokeiks tulla.

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group