Conspiracy theorists (and the republicans who believe them) lack critical thinking skills: New study

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,800
9,002
136
I love the conspiracy theory there is systemic rasicm by law enforcement against blacks. Which is bullshit.

The Day - Study findings challenge claims of systemic racism among police - News from southeastern Connecticut

Yes, we've all read, debated and even accepted the Harvard study on FOIS (fatal officer involved shootings) which concludes--fash police shoot to kill equally!

But that is just one study on one aspect of policing, nevermind the larger, more complex criminal justice system. To say systemic racism is "bullshit" isn't just willfully ignorant, it's moronic.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
21,004
19,442
136
Yes, we've all read, debated and even accepted the Harvard study on FOIS (fatal officer involved shootings) which concludes--fash police shoot to kill equally!

But that is just one study on one aspect of policing, nevermind the larger, more complex criminal justice system. To say systemic racism is "bullshit" isn't just willfully ignorant, it's moronic.
I'd like to see our resistant conservative idiots state they'd be fine being a poor black in the custody of our justice system vs being a white anybody.

They are a bunch of fucking assholes at this point. Willfully obstructing reality for a fucked up narrative.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
55,825
13,865
146
I love the conspiracy theory there is systemic rasicm by law enforcement against blacks. Which is bullshit.

The Day - Study findings challenge claims of systemic racism among police - News from southeastern Connecticut

Holy crap.

You REALLY need to read that article. Seriously. It doesn't say what you think it does and the very author of the study wishes you would stop using it that way.


The News department accused Mac Donald of “cherry picking” a study by Harvard economist Roland G. Fryer Jr. by referencing only Fryer’s finding of no racial disparities, much less racism, in fatal officer-involved shootings (FOIS) while making no mention of Fryer’s finding of substantial racial disparities in police use of non-lethal force.

Well, in mid-June, Opinion ran an op-ed by Fryer, giving him an opportunity to outline his findings on FOIS versus use of non-lethal force and to say, “People who invoke our work to argue that systemic racism is a myth conveniently ignore these (non-lethal force) statistics.”

You cherry picked a cherry out of a cherry picked study to tell a story that the study itself doesn't even say.

That's like a whole fucking pie of cherries.

Oh, and your readily apparent lack of critical thinking skills really just proved the entire point of this thread.

FAIL.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pmv and ivwshane

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
Holy crap.

You REALLY need to read that article. Seriously. It doesn't say what you think it does and the very author of the study wishes you would stop using it that way.


The News department accused Mac Donald of “cherry picking” a study by Harvard economist Roland G. Fryer Jr. by referencing only Fryer’s finding of no racial disparities, much less racism, in fatal officer-involved shootings (FOIS) while making no mention of Fryer’s finding of substantial racial disparities in police use of non-lethal force.

Well, in mid-June, Opinion ran an op-ed by Fryer, giving him an opportunity to outline his findings on FOIS versus use of non-lethal force and to say, “People who invoke our work to argue that systemic racism is a myth conveniently ignore these (non-lethal force) statistics.”

You cherry picked a cherry out of a cherry picked study to tell a story that the study itself doesn't even say.

That's like a while fucking pie of cherries.

FAIL.

It’s why he hasn’t returned to this again. He knows he’s wrong and he’s not man enough to admit it.

As I stated before though, he proved the OP’s point perfectly.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,630
2,014
126
It’s why he hasn’t returned to this again. He knows he’s wrong and he’s not man enough to admit it.

As I stated before though, he proved the OP’s point perfectly.

Look at all the posts he made around the same time as this one, he was clearly drunk AF.
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,800
9,002
136
Oh hey look, didn't take but 24 hours for yet another example of systemic racism in policing to emerge:


One thing missing in the article is comparing each of these neighborhood's predicted crime #s vs. actual #s...I'd say it's only "racist" if we a wider discrepancy in the black neighborhoods. But even then, there's the old adage of cops only finding crime wherever they look, and not where they're not looking.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,716
47,399
136
Holy crap.

You REALLY need to read that article. Seriously. It doesn't say what you think it does and the very author of the study wishes you would stop using it that way.


The News department accused Mac Donald of “cherry picking” a study by Harvard economist Roland G. Fryer Jr. by referencing only Fryer’s finding of no racial disparities, much less racism, in fatal officer-involved shootings (FOIS) while making no mention of Fryer’s finding of substantial racial disparities in police use of non-lethal force.

Well, in mid-June, Opinion ran an op-ed by Fryer, giving him an opportunity to outline his findings on FOIS versus use of non-lethal force and to say, “People who invoke our work to argue that systemic racism is a myth conveniently ignore these (non-lethal force) statistics.”

You cherry picked a cherry out of a cherry picked study to tell a story that the study itself doesn't even say.

That's like a whole fucking pie of cherries.

Oh, and your readily apparent lack of critical thinking skills really just proved the entire point of this thread.

FAIL.
I see you are using my unique, expert, and carefully honed method of argumentation called ‘actually read their links’. How diabolical.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Amused