Crime Harvard professor says ‘all hell broke loose’ when his study found no racial bias in police shootings

Roop Holstry said:
I’ve been seeing this similarity as well. But he seems even more emotional. Maybe Brackis took some time off and came back as a woman.
Click to expand...
Author of the study in the op "the findings of my study are not indicative of national trends". Yeah hold this giant fucking L loser 🤣
 
blackheart said:
Author of the study in the op "the findings of my study are not indicative of national trends". Yeah hold this giant fucking L loser 🤣
Click to expand...
tenor.gif
 
blackheart said:
Yeah repeatedly pointing out the stupidity of citing a study whose author explicitly said that their study does not agree with the chuds itt, means I'm having a meltdown.
Click to expand...
Right or wrong, fact or fiction... does not matter my friend. It's like accusing you of being Brackis. If you try to correct it or elucidate exactly why it makes no sense, they'll just insist on it even more, while they tickle each other like monkeys. Keep in mind the chuds here probably look/act like this irl and respond accordingly:

7PFY.gif


It can be fun to play with them at times, but there's no point in getting too wonkish, it just ain't gonna work.
 
HOLA said:
Right or wrong, fact or fiction... does not matter my friend. It's like accusing you of being Brackis. If you try to correct it or elucidate exactly why it makes no sense, they'll just insist on it even more, while they tickle each other like monkeys. Keep in mind the chuds here probably look/act like this irl and respond accordingly:

7PFY.gif


It can be fun to play with them at times, but there's no point in getting too wonkish, it just ain't gonna work.
Click to expand...
goteem-go-team.gif
 
Mr Holmes said:
From what I heard he did the study twice with a different set of researchers, and the results appear go against his own beliefs and are detrimental to his career, so I'm inclined to believe the conclusion.
Click to expand...

- I think calling cops racists is unfair. Because the numbers show very feel people gettting shot by american cops, judging the number of encounters.

I think american cops have more fear of getting shot, because is a contrie full of people carrying guns.

But i also assume is a profession that will atrackt some racists.
 
blackheart said:
You should really bother actually reading articles instead of just headlines and immediately rushing to reaffirm your biases that already existed

Here's an admission from the study itself
"There are no systematic datasets which include officer involved shootings along with demographics, encounter characteristics, and suspect and police behavior. We compile a data set on officer-involved shootings from ten locations across America"

God DAMN - that's a pretty fucking big problem with the study's design isn't it? They don't have a dataset on officer involved shootings that includes demographics??? They compiled their own data from 10 American cities? Who is doing that compiling? What data are they selecting?

Tell me you've never stepped foot in a college classroom without telling me you've never stepped foot in a college classroom

"Hurr durrrr, me see headline that confirms what I already believe. Me believe headline instantly"
86ab6942c40e86b38bee4f7109f90070.gif
Click to expand...
Who is doing the compiling? Roland Fryer and his research assistants. What data are they selecting? That's answered in the full study, its tables, its footnotes, and the appendix.
 
Mr Holmes said:
From what I heard he did the study twice with a different set of researchers, and the results appear go against his own beliefs and are detrimental to his career, so I'm inclined to believe the conclusion.
Click to expand...

He used the exact same methods and approached the data the exact same way, it isn't really a surprise he came to the same conclusions. I suspect your trust in his conclusions wouldn't exist if he offered the opposite conclusion, in fact I'm pretty certain you'd be saying he was DEI and couldn't be trusted.

Do you trust his conclusion that black people are more likely to experience racially motivated force? Do you trust the hundreds of studies that have shown the justice system has been racist since it was created?

Or is your only position that Soros DAs aren't putting enough black people behind bars?
 
blackheart said:
Author of the study in the op "the findings of my study are not indicative of national trends". Yeah hold this giant fucking L loser 🤣
Click to expand...
He goes pretty far in downplaying it in his actual papers. He calls it "the most granular data," says it is "far from a representative sample of police departments," and also adds "we need more and better data."

With all that in mind, I'm wondering what was the point of publishing it at all? Just to stir the pot?

Perhaps the fact that he was suspended without pay from his job had something to do with his decision to publish it.
 
Loiosh said:
He used the exact same methods and approached the data the exact same way, it isn't really a surprise he came to the same conclusions. I suspect your trust in his conclusions wouldn't exist if he offered the opposite conclusion, in fact I'm pretty certain you'd be saying he was DEI and couldn't be trusted.

Do you trust his conclusion that black people are more likely to experience racially motivated force? Do you trust the hundreds of studies that have shown the justice system has been racist since it was created?

Or is your only position that Soros DAs aren't putting enough black people behind bars?
Click to expand...
Oh here we go. Make sure to call a racist because I'm not some far left clown.
tenor.gif
 
Mr Holmes said:
Oh here we go. Make sure to call a racist because I'm not some far left clown.
tenor.gif
Click to expand...
Oh so you don't have a single answer to the multitude of specific directed non rhetorical questions that Loiosh asked you? I am so surprised.
 
HOLA said:
A 2019 study by Princeton University political scientists disputed the findings by Fryer, saying that if police had a higher threshold for stopping whites, this might mean that the whites, Hispanics and blacks in Fryer's data are not similar.[24] Nobel-laureate James Heckman and Steven Durlauf, both University of Chicago economists, published a response to the Fryer study, writing that the paper "does not establish credible evidence on the presence or absence of discrimination against African Americans in police shootings" due to issues with selection bias.[25]
Click to expand...
LOL. To translate, Heckman and Durlauf offered, "Well, if we manipulated his data not to reflect the reality it reflects, instead pretending the world conformed to our liberal ideological notion of what policing should be, rather than what it is, then the conclusions of his study from the data would be invalid."

That's some of the most irresponsible scholarship I've seen in a while. I can't believe they went on record saying this. Because they are contending that despite if the police did not have a "higher threshold for stopping whites" this would have no effect on the number of citizens shot-- which would then affect the ratios. They're theoretically changing one number while asserting it has no potential to change another.

Shame on them.
 
Madmick said:
Who is doing the compiling? Roland Fryer and his research assistants. What data are they selecting? That's answered in the full study, its tables, its footnotes, and the appendix.
Click to expand...
God damn, was that so hard? At the next chud cookout, you really gotta give your compatriots a good talking to about their complete refusal to read. It's getting embarrassing.
 
Mr Holmes said:
Oh here we go. Make sure to call a racist because I'm not some far left clown.
tenor.gif
Click to expand...

I didn't call you a racist, I asked you questions.

Feel free to answer them in a way that isn't racist.

And do you actually know what the "far left" is? The Overton window has shifted so far to the right you guys probably consider Winston Churchill far left.
 
I question all studies, whether I agree with them or not, unless they're just absolute common sense.

Studies can be as corrupt as anything else. They're funded by biased and/or corrupt individuals. Performed by biased and/or corrupt individuals. Peer checked by biased and/or corrupt individuals and then interpreted, disseminated and ingested by biased and/or corrupt individuals.
 
Mr Holmes said:
From what I heard he did the study twice with a different set of researchers, and the results appear go against his own beliefs and are detrimental to his career, so I'm inclined to believe the conclusion.
Click to expand...
It wasn't detrimental to his career. He got barred from his research lab in March 2018, forced to resign from the American Economic Association in December of 2018 and finally suspended without pay from Harvard for 2 years in July of 2019.

He didn't actually publish this paper until June of 2019. His career was already in the shitter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Arkain2K
Social Legacy Admission: Harvard Under Fire For Helping Elite Skip The Queue
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
rearnakedchoke
rearnakedchoke

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,238,748
Messages
55,583,990
Members
174,830
Latest member
Brendan The Hybrid Schaub

Share this page

Back
Top