Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
bugbear wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:
J G Miller wrote:
On Sunday, July 25th, 2010 at 04:09:08h +0100, Bill Wright wrote:
Research into the relationship between intelligence and race is not
allowed.
You had better tell that to Professor J P Rushton who has been
conducting research on and off in that area for over 20 years.
Yes, and doesn't he get some flak for it!
But it *is* allowed.

In the strict sense that you don't get thrown into prison for it, yes,
it's allowed. But those looking for a research grant or hoping for a
long career and advancement have good reasons to avoid the study of the
correlation between race and intelligence, and also anything that
questions the global warming religion.

How much experience have you had of either sitting on the relevant funding
panels or acting as a referee for the applications they get?

Such experience isn't necessary. The facts are well known, to those of
us who don't read the Guardian or believe the BBC.

Bill

Bill

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
bugbear wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:
J G Miller wrote:
On Sunday, July 25th, 2010 at 04:09:08h +0100, Bill Wright wrote:
Research into the relationship between intelligence and race is
not allowed.
You had better tell that to Professor J P Rushton who has been
conducting research on and off in that area for over 20 years.
Yes, and doesn't he get some flak for it!
But it *is* allowed.

In the strict sense that you don't get thrown into prison for it,
yes, it's allowed. But those looking for a research grant or hoping
for a long career and advancement have good reasons to avoid the
study of the correlation between race and intelligence, and also
anything that questions the global warming religion.

How much experience have you had of either sitting on the relevant
funding panels or acting as a referee for the applications they get?

Such experience isn't necessary. The facts are well known, to those of
us who don't read the Guardian or believe the BBC.

Ah, OK, the "fact established by mere assertion" route... Well known in
academic circles. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
..
In the strict sense that you don't get thrown into prison for it,
yes, it's allowed. But those looking for a research grant or hoping
for a long career and advancement have good reasons to avoid the
study of the correlation between race and intelligence, and also
anything that questions the global warming religion.
How much experience have you had of either sitting on the relevant
funding panels or acting as a referee for the applications they get?

Such experience isn't necessary. The facts are well known, to those of
us who don't read the Guardian or believe the BBC.

Ah, OK, the "fact established by mere assertion" route... Well known in
academic circles. :-)

Well, when the true facts are suppressed we men on the Clapham bendybus
have to reach our own conclusions!

Bill

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:39:24 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Those like Prof Rushton are very secure and can basically do what they
like.

He very nearly came unstuck in the 1980s or so. But because of the
publicity generated from that incident, he was able to maintain his
position, because he had already attained tenure, and so continued
to get grants and as a result is secure today in what he can do.

Ultimately it did come to a question of academic freedom and despite
the controversial nature of his research, the more important principle
prevailed.

In teaching it would be very dangerous to remark, for instance,
that the Afro-carribean boys seem to be more aggressive in the playground.

[More agressive than whom?]

Only if it was meant in a racial sense? Surely if observed in the cultural
sense it is celebrating their culture and promoting multi-cultural awareness?

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

On Monday, 26 July 2010, at 17:11:38h +0100, Jim Lesurf wrote:

Ah, OK, the "fact established by mere assertion" route... Well known in
academic circles. :-)

And from my observations the predominant form of argument on UseNet newsgroups.

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

On Mon, July 26th, 2010 at 17:43:12h +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Well, when the true facts are suppressed we men on the Clapham bendybus
have to reach our own conclusions!

Surely without true facts it is impossible to reach a conclusion,
and if one is made, then it will be a false conclusion?

Which of course prompts the question, "what is a true fact", and no matter
how true a fact, will not its interpretation always be colored by
personal bias and prejudice?

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In [email protected] w.co.uk, Andy
Burns
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In [email protected] w.co.uk, Andy
wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

David WE Roberts wrote:

It generally seems to pass people by that around 50% of the
population is below average intelligence.


I can't see this because there's no reason why IQ should form a
regular symetrical curve.

Depending on *which* average function you're talking about, that may
or may not be relevant ...

So far as I can recall mode and median are not averages. Are you
saying they are? if so, can you explain?

Well that was what I was taught; seems it's still being taught today

http://www.gcse.com/maths/averages.htm
http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/average

Interesting that such errors and muddles should propagate into such
sources.

Perhaps you'd like to post some form of reference that states that mode
and median are *not* forms of average, rather than assume we'll accept
that you are correct?

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

I'm quite happy to say it is "wrong" on the following basis.

That in general the mean, mode, and median all can return quite different
values for a given set of data. Indeed, there are also a set of different
sub-types of 'mean'. So as soon as you allow a term like "The Average"
(note use of definite article) to mean *all* of them symultaneously (i.e.
as "synonyms")

They are not all "the average" they are all types *of* average.

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

J G Miller wrote:

In teaching it would be very dangerous to remark, for instance,
that the Afro-carribean boys seem to be more aggressive in the playground.

[More agressive than whom?]
Than the rest of course.


Only if it was meant in a racial sense? Surely if observed in the cultural
sense it is celebrating their culture and promoting multi-cultural awareness?
No, you can't risk saying anything like that. It would be deliberately
misinterpreted by the PC nutters and you'd be suspended. We are utterly
beleagured by PC, afraid to open our mouths. Luckily my boss shares my
opinions so I'm all right.

Bill

Richard Desmond buys Channel Five
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In [email protected] w.co.uk, Andy
Burns
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In [email protected] w.co.uk, Andy
wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

David WE Roberts wrote:

It generally seems to pass people by that around 50% of the
population is below average intelligence.


I can't see this because there's no reason why IQ should form a
regular symetrical curve.

Depending on *which* average function you're talking about, that may
or may not be relevant ...

So far as I can recall mode and median are not averages. Are you
saying they are? if so, can you explain?

Well that was what I was taught; seems it's still being taught today

http://www.gcse.com/maths/averages.htm
http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/average

Interesting that such errors and muddles should propagate into such
sources.

Let's try another source then ...

http://openmoodle.conted.ox.ac.uk/file.php/10/Unit1/HandlingAndDescribingData/SummaryStatistics.xhtml

"If you want to summarise a set of values you will often use an average
value [...] The most commonly used average is the arithmetic mean"

Notice it says *an* average, rather than *the* average, it goes on to
say "Another average is the median", admittedly it does later say "The
last commonly used measure of central tendency is the mode".

I would take that to indicate that "measure of central tendency" is
analogous to "type of average", you would presumably read it differently?