Zone1 Should college professors be committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion in order to be hired by a university?

[Hector12]

Naw, man, you picked a rather disgusting fetish as a screen name... I'm note sure why.. because it's weird.



Rushton was utterly refuted in that his data sources were flawed, and he went into his study with a foregone conclusion, which isn't how science works.



I found data on the internet that Bigfoot is real. Must be true. It's on the internet!

You either do not know how to evaluate evidence, or you refuse to accept evidence that violates what you want to believe.

Professor Rushton compiled fact after brutal punishing fact to prove what is obviously true.

Again I ask: provide evidence that he was mistaken.

 

[JoeB131]

You either do not know how to evaluate evidence, or you refuse to accept evidence that violates what you want to believe.

Professor Rushton compiled fact after brutal punishing fact to prove what is obviously true.

Again I ask: provide evidence that he was mistaken.

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-race-brain-size-rushton-cernovsky-j-of-black-psychology-1993.pdf

Contrary to Rushton 's postulates, aggregating large cohorts of methodologically weak studies leads to misleading conclusions. The review of his data shows that nonprofessional skull collections were included (race was possibly estimated from skull size) and the impact of factors, such as infant malnutrition and climate, on cranial or brain size was ignored. Statistical reanalyses of cranial data show that cranial size (a) is not a viable indicator of intelligence and (b) is similar in Negroids and Caucasoids from the same settings: It varies with the standard of living and climate (smaller crania are found in underdeveloped, warmer countries), not with race.

However, it has been sufficiently shown by various authors that his literature review is blatantly biased, his logic strained, and that he occasionally resorts to nonscientific sources of evidence, such as semipornographic literature (e.g., Penthouse or anonymous notes by "the French Army Surgeon" from 1898), overinterprets minor trends in the data, and uses pseudoscientific procedures, such as inferring intelligence from measures of head circumference by tape

It is generally known that infant malnutrition has been found to result in reduced brain size (Monckeberg, 1973). Malnutrition (e.g., as resulting from economic underdevelopment), common in excessively warm countries, could more parsimoniously account for "racial differences" in Rushton's data summaries than race. And, in fact, if we inspect one of Rushton's most detailed data summaries of cranial size (prepared by Rushton, 1990a, on the basis of Herskovits, 1930), the data match the pattern empirically detected by Beals et al. rather than the one postulated by Rushton: The cranial capacity of the Blacks from colder climates (North-American sample: average capacity = 1,622 cm3, N=961) is comparable to those of Northern Caucasians (e.g., Swedes: average = 1,593 cm3, N = 46,975), whereas the African Caucasians (the Cairo sample in Rushton's table: average = 1,502 cm3, N = 802) have values similar to African Blacks: for example, the Masai (average = 1,508 cm3, N = 91) and the Kajiji (average =1,515 cm3, N = 55).

 

[Hector12]

South China Morning Post

Why do Asians have bigger brains than Europeans or Africans?​

Stephen Chenin Beijing
+ FOLLOW
Published: 5:30pm, 28 Jan, 2017

The world’s largest survey of brain sizes, conducted by American scientists three decades ago using more than 20,000 modern human skulls from around the globe, found that the average cranial volume among East Asians was 1,415 cubic centimetres, compared with 1,362 for Europeans and 1,268 for Africans.

Subsequent studies have confirmed those results. Among them was a magnetic resonance imaging survey last year which found that East Asians had a higher cranial vault, which allowed their skulls to house a bigger brain.

Why do Asians have bigger brains than Europeans or Africans?

Chinese scientists discover natural selection played a role

www.scmp.com

 

[Hector12]

That Negroes tend to have smaller brains, and lower IQ's then whites and Orientals is only controversial because the discussion has been coerced in the West for two generations.

The discussion is not coerced in China, so exciting new discoveries are being made about the relationship between genetics and intelligence.

The smaller brains of Negroes has been attributed to black proficiency in foot races. Because black babies tend to have smaller brains, black women have more narrower hip bones. because wider hip bones are unnecessary to ease child birth among women whose babies have larger heads.

Therefore it can be said that Negroes usually have difficulty passing mental aptitude tests to become police officers for the same reason that Negroes are good at running from the police.

 

[JoeB131]

Subsequent studies have confirmed those results. Among them was a magnetic resonance imaging survey last year which found that East Asians had a higher cranial vault, which allowed their skulls to house a bigger brain.

Sweet Evil Jesus, are you going to bring up Phrenology next?

The discussion is not coerced in China, so exciting new discoveries are being made about the relationship between genetics and intelligence.

You're claiming China has more academic and press freedom than we do? Really? Is this what you are claiming?

Therefore it can be said that Negroes usually have difficulty passing mental aptitude tests to become police officers for the same reason that Negroes are good at running from the police.

That has about as much credibility as saying Jews have big noses because Air is free.

 

[Hector12]

Sweet Evil Jesus, are you going to bring up Phrenology next?


You're claiming China has more academic and press freedom than we do? Really? Is this what you are claiming?

View attachment 832694



That has about as much credibility as saying Jews have big noses because Air is free.

When it comes to genetics, intelligence, and race the Chinese certainly do have more freedom than we do.

Your last sentence is a false analogy.

 

[JoeB131]

When it comes to genetics, intelligence, and race the Chinese certainly do have more freedom than we do.

I have to kind of tread carefully here because I'm married to a Chinese woman who still loves the country of her birth.

The only opinions you are allowed to express in China are the ones approved by the government. The Chinese culture is incredibly racist against blacks, Europeans, or anyone who isn't Han Chinese.

Your last sentence is a false analogy.

So comments about big feet and wide hips are okay, but comments about big noses aren't?

 

[Hector12]

So comments about big feet and wide hips are okay, but comments about big noses aren't?

Small hips allow the birth of babies with small brains, which correlate with low intelligence. Small hips also are responsible for Negro proficiency in foot faces.

 

[hadit]

BS. And there is no acceptable level of racism.

That would make every nation on earth racist, since those with power always set things up in their favor, and that includes skin color, whether white, brown or black.

 

[Hector12]

BS. And there is no acceptable level of racism.

If blacks were equal to whites they would not need affirmative action to achieve diversity.

 

[JoeB131]

Small hips allow the birth of babies with small brains, which correlate with low intelligence. Small hips also are responsible for Negro proficiency in foot faces.

Holy shit, do you actually believe this stuff?

Also, have you seen the backsides of black women?

 

[JoeB131]

If blacks were equal to whites they would not need affirmative action to achieve diversity.

They need AA because white people are making all the hiring decisions.

 

[Hector12]

They need AA because white people are making all the hiring decisions.

In my first job as a computer programmer my computer shop hired a black programmer. It soon became clear that he could not do his job, he did not try, and he did not care. When I learned that he was earning twice what I was, I discussed the matter with our boss.

Our boss told me, "When I was promoted to my position I was told that I would be evaluated in part by my ability to attract and keep black subordinates, I was also told that I was supposed to expect less from them."

When our boss finally fired the black programmer, after giving him every conceivable opportunity to perform adequately, the president of our company reprehended him for about a half an hour. You see the black guy was not hired to do a job. He was hired to keep the company from being sued. When affirmative action is ended in hiring decisions that kind of thing will come to an end.

 

[JoeB131]

In my first job as a computer programmer my computer shop hired a black programmer. It soon became clear that he could not do his job, he did not try, and he did not care. When I learned that he was earning twice what I was, I discussed the matter with our boss.

Ah, now we are getting to it. Now, the funny thing is, most places will fire you these days just asking what other employees are being paid.

I can think of several reasons why this guy was being paid more. Maybe he had more degrees. Maybe he was more charismatic or had a more impressive-looking resume. Maybe he was hired during a tight labor market, and you were hired during high unemployment. For instance, during the 2008 recession, the weasel I worked for fired the people who had been with him for a decade and hired a bunch of replacements who worked for cheaper.

Our boss told me, "When I was promoted to my position I was told that I would be evaluated in part by my ability to attract and keep black subordinates, I was also told that I was supposed to expect less from them."

First, I don't see any manager telling a boss that, and I don't see any boss worth his salt sharing that kind of information if it were true.

When our boss finally fired the black programmer, after giving him every conceivable opportunity to perform adequately, the president of our company reprehended him for about a half an hour. You see the black guy was not hired to do a job. He was hired to keep the company from being sued. When affirmative action is ended in hiring decisions that kind of thing will come to an end.

Reprehended him? Do you mean reprimanded?

Wow, you work on a lot of bad assumptions.

First, there is no "quota system" in private hiring. True, an employee can sue if he gets turned down for a job, but usually, when a company is taking severe corrective action like that, it's because they've already been caught discriminating by EEOC or some labor board.

If someone sues, and you find they've only been hiring white people, including the Boss' idiot nephew, you are probably going to be in a lot of trouble, particularly if they go through all the resumes and find Jamal Washington had a degree and a longer work history than the idiot nephew did.

This is why most companies don't leave hiring decisions up to one person. I can honestly say that in the last three jobs I've gotten, a committee interviewed me. (not to mention the dozens of places I interviewed at that didn't hire me.) In two of those jobs, I had an inside track because someone on the inside recommended me.

So, even if SCOTUS strikes down private sector affirmative action, expect employers to keep covering their asses, hiring a couple of unqualified minorities to make up for the unqualified idiot nephews. Just like they'll hire some worthless females to keep from being sued for sex discrimination.

 

[Hector12]

Ah, now we are getting to it. Now, the funny thing is, most places will fire you these days just asking what other employees are being paid.

I can think of several reasons why this guy was being paid more. Maybe he had more degrees. Maybe he was more charismatic or had a more impressive-looking resume. Maybe he was hired during a tight labor market, and you were hired during high unemployment. For instance, during the 2008 recession, the weasel I worked for fired the people who had been with him for a decade and hired a bunch of replacements who worked for cheaper.




First, I don't see any manager telling a boss that, and I don't see any boss worth his salt sharing that kind of information if it were true.



Reprehended him? Do you mean reprimanded?

Yes.

Wow, you work on a lot of bad assumptions.

First, there is no "quota system" in private hiring. True, an employee can sue if he gets turned down for a job, but usually, when a company is taking severe corrective action like that, it's because they've already been caught discriminating by EEOC or some labor board.

If someone sues, and you find they've only been hiring white people, including the Boss' idiot nephew, you are probably going to be in a lot of trouble, particularly if they go through all the resumes and find Jamal Washington had a degree and a longer work history than the idiot nephew did.

This is why most companies don't leave hiring decisions up to one person. I can honestly say that in the last three jobs I've gotten, a committee interviewed me. (not to mention the dozens of places I interviewed at that didn't hire me.) In two of those jobs, I had an inside track because someone on the inside recommended me.

So, even if SCOTUS strikes down private sector affirmative action, expect employers to keep covering their asses, hiring a couple of unqualified minorities to make up for the unqualified idiot nephews. Just like they'll hire some worthless females to keep from being sued for sex discrimination.

School administrators are doing what they can to admit blacks who do not belong on campus, despite the Supreme Court decision. I hope they will be sued.

Few bosses like being pressured to hire blacks who cannot do the work.

 

[JoeB131]

School administrators are doing what they can to admit blacks who do not belong on campus, despite the Supreme Court decision. I hope they will be sued.

So what, they'll keep doing it until we get a sane Supreme Court.

The problem is you want to leave Legacies, Athletics, Donor, and Family admissions intact, but get rid of the affirmative action admissions, you've already defeated your argument this was purely about merit.

Few bosses like being pressured to hire blacks who cannot do the work.

Most bosses aren't bigots like you.

I've seen plenty of blacks fired who couldn't do the job and a few who could who were fired anyway.

I've seen plenty of people who should have been fired who weren't because they were white.

Life isn't fair, really.

 

[Hector12]

So what, they'll keep doing it until we get a sane Supreme Court.

The problem is you want to leave Legacies, Athletics, Donor, and Family admissions intact, but get rid of the affirmative action admissions, you've already defeated your argument this was purely about merit.

I lack enthusiasm for legacies and athletic scholarships, but they benefit a university financially. Rich families are likely to contribute money to a university if at least one of their children gets in. Universities are notorious for giving football and basketball scholarships to men who are usually black, and who can't read, write, or perform mathematics at an eighth grade level.

Nevertheless, this kind of favoritism, only exists for football and basketball, which make fortunes in ticket sales.

I see no benefit in lowering standards for blacks who cannot bring money to the university.

 

[JoeB131]

I lack enthusiasm for legacies and athletic scholarships, but they benefit a university financially.

Is a university about learning, or about bringing in money? YOu are contradicting yourself.

I see no benefit in lowering standards for blacks who cannot bring money to the university.

I know, man, ever since Jamal stuffed you into that locker, and your girlfriend laughed at you, you've not gotten over it.

 

[Hector12]

Is a university about learning, or about bringing in money? YOu are contradicting yourself.



I know, man, ever since Jamal stuffed you into that locker, and your girlfriend laughed at you, you've not gotten over it.

I can tell I have won the argument when you bring up your imaginary friend. There are black ghetto thugs like him. Ask them if they know who their fathers are. Ask them if their illegitimate children on welfare know who they are.

 

[JoeB131]

I can tell I have won the argument when you bring up your imaginary friend. There are black ghetto thugs like him. Ask them if they know who their fathers are. Ask them if their illegitimate children on welfare know who they are.

Why don't you ask him? Oh, wait, that's probably what got you stuffed into the locker in the first place.