Posted on 12/27/2023 1:24:27 AM PST by Libloather
Anointed at birth also was Anita Hill.
Anita was chosen and given privilege her whole life.
She got to DC and learned she was not what she thought she was
She actually was inconsistent. In one paper she showed one value for the statistic and standard error, in another different values. The second paper, probably the bogus one, indicates a significant decrease in white Democratic voter turnout when the Democrats offer a black candidate, the first one showed no significant effect, both “statics”, white voter turnout and standard error were supposedly analysis of the exact same election.
The original controversy arose in 2002 when other researchers asked to see the underlying data for the second paper. She used a somewhat exotic technique, which was not necessarily invalid or unreliable.
Since ballots are not (yet) marked with voter’s race, she used turnout in white precincts as a proxy for white voter turn out. Within limits one can make rough estimates of turnout based on these data. For instance, it is widely believed that black turnout for Barack Obama was significantly greater among black voters than in other elections where there was not a black (or at least Halfrican) candidate for president, based on turn out in black precincts nationwide.
Well, maybe you know more about her than I do.
“Affirmative action” has made all credentials totally fake for black “scholars”.
Think of it as Gresham’s Law in action—for academia.
“black turnout for Barack Obama was significantly greater among black voters than in other elections”
All voting analysis has a critical buried assumption—no statistically significant cheating.
If that assumption is not correct the analysis crashes and burns.
Here in CT I am 100% certain that much of black “voting” in the major cities is fraud.
I believe that people asked to see her raw data and she refused.
That doesn’t prove that she made stuff up, but it is a common assumption that if you won’t share your data with anyone, then your data is fake.
It’s a bit of a “Change My Mind” moment, where she can win the game easily and absolutely change my mind — she just needs to show the raw data.
And just to be clear: I don’t matter. I don’t need to see her data. Changing my mind is not important. But there are researchers out there complaining that she won’t show the data. They matter.
The peer review concept was designed to weed out frauds.
The problem is that these days most of academia is fraudsters—so now we have fraudsters signing off on the work of other liars and cheats.
Just another demonrat lying and cheating.
Logical Inconsistency in EI-Based Second-Stage Regressions
There is no evidence that their request was anything other than a good faith collegial inquiry, that may have resulted in constructive criticism, which while it might be embarrassing would not have necessarily caused a retraction of the paper, or accusations of fraud. It appears that Gay employed the technique in name only to mask the lack of evidence for her conclusions.
That addresses the validity of the underlying data. Anyone who does statical analysis needs to be aware of the underlying assumptions, granted, but increased voter turnout in black precincts in 2008 was almost certainly an indication of greater black voter turnout.
As you say:
It appears that Gay employed the technique in name only to mask the lack of evidence for her conclusions.
I'll accept that statement as better than what I was saying. I like it when you say she had a "lack of evidence for her conclusion".
What is Biden waiting for, appoint her as Head of National Security.
When you build statistical analysis on unreliable and unverifiable data what you have is...
a dumpster fire.
Yet lowering standard is nothing new for Harvard.
In a Harvard Crimson article, noted conservative Harvard professor Harvey Mansfield contended that,
"Grade inflation got started … when professors raised the grades of students protesting the war in Vietnam..." "At that time, too, white professors, imbibing the spirit of the new policies of affirmative action, stopped giving low grades to black students, and to justify or conceal this, also stopped giving low grades to white students." The problem was essentially seen as the predominance of the notion of self-esteem, "in which the purpose of education is to make students feel capable and 'empowered,' and professors should hesitate to pass judgment on what students have learned." Such assertions resulted in no small controversy.Harvard alumnus and author Ross Douthat attributed this problem partly to socioeconomic differences, and noted that "Harvard students are creatively lazy, gifted at working smarter rather than harder", being brilliant largely in their tactics "to achieve a maximal GPA in return for minimal effort." Few people who have taught at Harvard agree with Douthat's notions. - https://www.conservapedia.com/Harvard_University
Yes, that is her claim in her words. If it were me, I would turn that question around to be less biased:
In a representative republic, do white voters feel represented by black House Representatives?
Based on how the first thing that black Representatives do is join the House Congressional Black Caucus, and seeing how the CBC has rejected the membership of Republican black Representatives, it is a fair question to ask if black Representatives are or are not agenda-driven more than white constituent driven, and turn out accordingly?
To me, it's not because white voters are racist, it's because black Representatives are agenda-focused, and that agenda does not include supporting white voters.
-PJ
The most basic tenet of scientific review (assuming political science IS science) is the ability to reproduce results by independent researches.
Refusing to release the underlying data is an overt attempt to prevent independent analysis for fear of not being able to (or knowing they won't be able to) reproduce the results.
-PJ
You saved me some typing.
Did the climate “hockey stick” inventor ever release his data?
I believe Steve McEntyre an early Mann critic and professional commercial econometrician got a couple of it. If I remember this right, he couldn’t reproduce Mann’s result at least in the form that Mann did.
Obama-nation. Pure effing garbage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.