What Lives Matter?

[Husar]

To think the amount of times I hesitated to open this thread for fear that you would actually present something irrefutable and prove me wrong, I am extremely dissapointed.

The irrefutable proof you are looking for does not really exist, it's like we're standing in the middle of a forest and you look at a map and tell me that the correlation between a few trees and the green area on the map does not prove the existence of forests and blame me for being unable to provide chemical proof that the trees are indeed made out of wood in the first place.

I'm just saying that IMO you're just moving the goalposts around until it becomes impossible for me to prove this without joining the social sciences myself and conducting a myriad of studies. And even then you'd claim that I was biased the whole time anyway and wasted the last ten years of my life. I have just learned to see when an argument with you becomes pointless and I can go and find better ways to spend my time.

What you make of it or how many victories you claim is your problem as long as I don't have to chase and read studies for 50 hours only to have you proclaim that they don't convince you for some reason anyway.

Oh yeah, if you want me to show you the studies on the subject instead of newspapers citing them, here you go:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...5.1996.9714029
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...73039508720824
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1....1975.11413782
http://www.jstor.org/stable/797509?s...n_tab_contents

Notice anything about your goalposts yet or do I need to go on?

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/ort/63/4/536/
http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=...1999-11644-001
https://books.google.de/books?hl=en&...0study&f=false
http://esj.sagepub.com/content/1/1/83.short

There you have your primary sources, have fun reading them.

[Greyblades]

Oh no, dont stop there, I mean if it is so clear you dont feel the need to explain it initially it should be easy to explain to the audience why it is bullshit.

I mean I could see the argument that it isnt the majority of the community, there does seem to be a dirth of anyone above the age of 30 when I see pictures of the rioters and I've allready exhibited that there are members of the community that see the riots for the counterproductive overreactions they are.

Yes I believe I should be more discerning and not blame the entire community for the actions of the loud minority, a very good point, wish it was you making it instead of wasting my time giving pithy dismissals.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...5.1996.9714029
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...73039508720824
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1....1975.11413782
http://www.jstor.org/stable/797509?s...n_tab_contents

Notice anything about your goalposts yet or do I need to go on?

Yes, I cant access those, hell of a goalpost shift. Did you pay £24 for access or did you just grab the first 4 studies on google without actually even checking they were viewable?

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/ort/63/4/536/
http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=...1999-11644-001

Cant read those either.

https://books.google.de/books?hl=en&...0study&f=false

Hmm 2 stars, I wonder why the people who read it gave that.

Racism is a poison. There can be no doubt about that. Shirley Better gives us all the ammunition to battle this but doesn't give the right bullets to load the weapon. Thus, what started as a noble cause to strike a blow for racial equality, will backfire. Fighting racism is not knew. Blacks have been attempting to do this since the inception and implementation of slavery. I fail to see the relevance of that chapter. Overall, the book is more about a society that Ms. Better wishes to change than a society that wishes to change itself.

This is purported to be a text book of some sort. It is a strange one written in the first person and full of silly errors. In one passage, the author is aghast that a CEO might make "400 percent" of the salary of the lowest paid worker in the company. Assuming the lowest paid worker makes minimum wage, her CEO would be making less than a bus driver in NYC. I assume she meant "400 times" the salary.
I was looking for sources for a sociology paper. My professor would fail me if I used this book.

Ouch.

Edit: my this is a promising read, the author starts out with a quote from herself.
Christ looking at the reviews on amazon for her books gives the same vibe I got reading through the people espousing Benjamin Freedman's speeches while researching for the immigration thread.

http://esj.sagepub.com/content/1/1/83.short

Another purchase required.

There you have your primary sources, have fun reading them.

Your primary resources are either inaccessable or obscure books that you likely havent read anyway. I'm getting the feeling the opinion you espouse is harder to actually prove than you expected.

[Husar]

Yes, I cant access those, hell of a goalpost shift. Did you pay £24 for access or did you just grab the first 4 studies on google without actually even checking they were viewable?
Cant read those either.

So you don't care about the truth if it costs you anything?
And in the same sentence you blame me for not investing enough time...

Your primary resources are either inaccessable or obscure books that you likely havent read anyway. I'm getting the feeling the opinion you espouse is harder to actually prove than you expected.

I might put more effort into it but everything on the internet is a machine per default, until you can prove beyond any doubt that you're a human, why bother?

[Greyblades]

So you don't care about the truth if it costs you anything?

I dont care about a "truth" that a believer cannot prove without making the person they are trying to persuade pay a fee.

Scientology should sue institutional racism for copying thier business plans.

[Husar]

I dont care about a "truth" that a believer cannot prove without making the person they are trying to persuade pay a fee.

Again, your problem, it's not like you could show anything that could convince me that I'm wrong. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree and let the people riot as much as they want to then. It's too bad, for a moment here I thought by convincing you I could save the world, but it was not meant to be.

[Fragony]

Again, your problem, it's not like you could show anything that could convince me that I'm wrong. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree and let the people riot as much as they want to then. It's too bad, for a moment here I thought by convincing you I could save the world, but it was not meant to be.

How do you manage to not assume this isn't a race iisue?

[Husar]

How do you manage to not assume this isn't a race iisue?

How can you manage to assume that I manage to assume this isn't a race iisue?

[Legs]

Again, your problem, it's not like you could show anything that could convince me that I'm wrong. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree and let the people riot as much as they want to then. It's too bad, for a moment here I thought by convincing you I could save the world, but it was not meant to be.

How can you expect him to read your links when he doesn't even read the studies in his own links?

[Legs]

Oh no, dont stop there, I mean if it is so clear you dont feel the need to explain it initially it should be easy to explain to the audience why it is bullshit.

I mean I could see the argument that it isnt the majority of the community, there does seem to be a dirth of anyone above the age of 30 when I see pictures of the rioters and I've allready exhibited that there are members of the community that see the riots for the counterproductive overreactions they are.

Yes I believe I should be more discerning and not blame the entire community for the actions of the loud minority, a very good point, wish it was you making it instead of wasting my time giving pithy dismissals.

See, "Bullshit" was entirely sufficient to do the job.
Now perhaps you can apply the same process to your other postings and the huge generalisations you make which you then try to morph into a coherent point.

[Fragony]

See, "Bullshit" was entirely sufficient to do the job.
Now perhaps you can apply the same process to your other postings and the huge generalisations you make which you then try to morph into a coherent point.

You can't me what I'm not