Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I've proven everything I have said. Just as I proved that blacks don't get 230 points on the SAT for being black.I've proven everything.
You CLAIM everything. Prove nothing. Let us know when you get your weperations. They are in the mail.
handicaps on tests of verbal skills should be slowly PHASED OUT-------they are counter-
productive
Many Asians are speaking English as a second language and are not only punished for their race in order to enable blacks, but do better on the verbal ANYWAY.
You don't point out facts.Untrue.The one group it hurts most is Asians.
Ahem.
View attachment 272917
Denial is all you got.
I've proven everything I have said.
Untrue.
Yes. We have seen your "proofs."Denial is all you got.
Well, speaking of "off topic", this thread went off the rails in a hurry.Yep . we have had three generations of blacks receiving the benefits of affirmative action. They receive a 230 point boost on their SAT scores compared to whites for college admissions and a 280 point boost compared to Asians. They also go to the head of the queue for jobs.It's also racist to disagree with a self-appointed self-vindicating black man like IM2 who hides in his own threads telling the world that the White Man is at fault for and to blame for every thing the Blacks have done to themselves.It’s racist to criticize a minority Democrat politician.
It’s racist to complain about the mass illegal immigration border crisis.
Except blacks didn't do it to ourselves.
Sorry, Toolstain, but Whites didn't do it to ourselves either! Why do you keep insisting on apply standards from centuries old to modern situations! I just read an article on how a White woman in the late 19th century got hired at Harvard as an astro-cartographer despite everything built 100% against her. She did so by perseverance and applying herself, not whining and making childish demands. And she ended up proving herself as not just the equal to other men, but BETTER. Whatever happened in centuries past happened because it was natural at that time. Times change. Things evolve. That is the nature of things. Today we build a better building than we did 50 years ago, and that was better than 50 years before it. Humanity leans by MAKING mistakes. You learn what is right by doing what is wrong. Tons of Blacks today are succeeding in the world because they are going out and getting educated and COMPETING in the free market and winning, not whining, bitching, blaming and demanding based on issues long, long dead and past. Some people learn that you win by wining, not hiding behind rules and getting your critics blocked and silenced from voicing their pinions. What goes around comes around and now I see you too have paid the piper, a victim of your on machinations! HaHa
View attachment 272888
The problem here is that not enough avail themselves to the opportunities they DO have and that is entirely upon themselves. Go through life with a contempt for education and hard work and OF COURSE you won't qualify for college .
Black racists like to blame whites when blacks do not take advantage of the preferential treatment they are given, but the failure to take it is all theirs.
Whites have had 20 generations of AA. Blacks alone have never had preferences.
That is a lie. You are lying quite intentionally.Yep . we have had three generations of blacks receiving the benefits of affirmative action. They receive a 230 point boost on their SAT scores compared to whites for college admissions and a 280 point boost compared to Asians. They also go to the head of the queue for jobs.
The problem here is that not enough avail themselves to the opportunities they DO have and that is entirely upon themselves. Go through life with a contempt for education and hard work and OF COURSE you won't qualify for college .
Black racists like to blame whites when blacks do not take advantage of the preferential treatment they are given, but the failure to take it is all theirs.
Whites have had 20 generations of AA. Blacks alone have never had preferences.
A 230 point bonus to black SAT scores can't be called anything BUT preferential treatment.
I guess you are going to continue whining about this and ignore 243 years of white preferential treatment in every area of society. That is not a lie. So until you can, you can go fuck your self.
Yes, I point out facts that contradict your assertions. Thank you for noticing.
As far as fucking myself, I do appreciate the suggestion. Try as I might, however, I can barely get it half way in before it plops back out.
Now, back to the 230 point advantage you receive as a reward for the color of your skin -- What could any sane person call that, if not an advantage?
You don't point out facts.
In conversations you have consistently whined that minority students, particularly Blacks, earn extra points on the SAT’s by virtue of indicating their racial identity. I dismissed the idea as not relevant because it was not specific to the topic being discussed. This has not been the first time a white racist here has made this claim So over the past couple of years, I took the opportunity to look for the facts.
There is plenty of information about SAT scores and minorities. But the most immediate hits from this type of search shows two types of sources.
1) Sources that discuss the score disparity on the SAT for minorities and discusses why it exists, how it has changed over time, and what still can be done to change it. These articles are from places like PBS and Inside Higher Ed.
2) Sources that discuss the bonus points that minority students of color receive or that highlight the point deductions that Asian students are subject to on the SAT’s. These articles are from places like The Conservative Treehouse and The Daily Stormer.
As a researcher who has over 30 years of experience, I have a slight advantage over others who have not had these years of experience. Especially in these days of search engines as opposed to going to libraries. However, if it clucks, regardless of whether you have training as a veterinarian you can probably figure out it’s a chicken.
Red flag # 1 The clearly partisan nature of the URL’s for the sites.
Red flag #2 The articles I read all discussed the same single study.
Red flag # 3 All the articles referred to a loosely named “Princeton University Study” without reference to any researchers, research institutes, journals that published the study, or title of the study.
Red flag # 4 No article linked to the actual study.
Red flag #5 The links that were provided were to other articles which made the same claims.
Red flag #6 The articles cited the same chunk of text (or paraphrased) without indication of where the actual text came from except that it is from a powerpoint presentation from someone named Ann Lee. The original article, from the Los Angeles Times, seems to be the first to discuss the powerpoint presentation and is linked to and/or cited by the others. A seemingly legitimate (unbiased) source it does not actually tell us who this Ann Lee is.
Red flag #7 The articles do not discuss the research. Rather, they discuss Ann Lee’s powerpoint presentation about the research.
Red flag #8 To find the actual research I had to stop following the path led by these articles and instead do an entire new search for the research itself. I was able to find the study and another related study by the same lead researchers easily once I stopped looking at these clearly partisan sites that were discussing the study. In other words, the articles citing the study as evidence actually made it hard for me to find the actual study itself by not giving the basic information on the study (authors, title, or link).
Red flag #9 Eventually, I came across one cite that was more neutral and provided relevant information. This was an article from The Daily Pennsylvanian which provides more information on this mysterious Ann Lee who it turns out “runs a college preparatory tutoring center in Arcadia, Calif.” This article also specifies the authors of the study “Thomas J. Espenshade, Chang Y. Chung and Joan L. Walling” and provides more details about their research by way of a description and a, unfortunately broken, link to the actual research.
Turns out, the actual study concludes the exact opposite of what Ann Lee’s powerpoint presentation concludes. In the “Princeton University Study” research, the authors reach three conclusions:
1) Colleges provide lots of preferences that benefit certain students and not others including legacy admissions; despite this,
2) affirmative action in admissions processes that only serve to benefit Black and Hispanic minorities, regardless of SAT scores, are the only ones that are surrounded in controversy; and
3) without these preferences for Blacks and Hispanics (because of the ways in which racial and socio-economic disparities intersect in the country at large), members of these groups would be disproportionately unable to be admitted to elite universities.
What the article actually says is:
"It is possible to convert the magnitude of these preferences to a common SAT metric. The bonus for African-American applicants is roughly equivalent to an extra 230 SAT points (on a 1600-point scale), to 185 points for Hispanics, 200 points for athletes, and 160 points for children of alumni. The Asian disadvantage is comparable to a loss of 50 SAT points."p. 1431
Where is the confusion between this research and Ann Lee’s powerpoint about the research? Ann Lee, the author of the LA Times article, and all those who cite that article and discuss Lee’s presentation misinterpret the study and assert some version of the following related to SAT scores:
"African Americans received a “bonus” of 230 points, Lee says…. “Hispanics received a bonus of 185 points.”
The disparity between the powerpoint presentation and the research is that there is no bonus points on the SAT but instead there are a combination of considerations that go into decision making to accept any person that applies to a college, one of which is the SAT.
So, no, minorities do not earn bonus points on the SAT.
Think of it this way. In decision making for entrance into college a student may submit SAT scores, demographic information, references, past experience relevant to academics, high school GPA, an essay or two, may get interviewed, and so forth. The reason all of these are required is because colleges, as they should, identify that a student is more than a single test score. The study shows that if all that mattered for Black and Hispanic minorities was the SAT, they would be disadvantaged in trying to get into elite colleges. That is in part because of the advantage that other groups have outside of their SAT scores (legacies for example) and from birth (high socio-economic status). But the reasons that other considerations are in place is because all students are more than their SAT scores. And all students should be given considerations, and are, that allow college admissions processes to balance out things that are out of the students’ control (from socio-economic status to having a bad day when you took the exam, to being a terrible test taker) to those that are more in the student’s control (personal essay, high school gpa, etc.) to demonstrate that student’s fit for the school.
In short, your consistent whining over 230 points is based on fake news and the 230 points do not exist.
You don't point out facts.Untrue.The one group it hurts most is Asians.
Ahem.
View attachment 272917
Denial is all you got.
Then I got it from you. You bought up all the denial on the block and now hold the exclusive rights. Everything I say is a matter of simple logic and common sense, everything you claim is racially driven and self-motivated. Not only is arguing with you futile but so is everything you argue for. NONE of it will ever happen.
That is a lie. You are lying quite intentionally.Whites have had 20 generations of AA. Blacks alone have never had preferences.
A 230 point bonus to black SAT scores can't be called anything BUT preferential treatment.
I guess you are going to continue whining about this and ignore 243 years of white preferential treatment in every area of society. That is not a lie. So until you can, you can go fuck your self.
Yes, I point out facts that contradict your assertions. Thank you for noticing.
As far as fucking myself, I do appreciate the suggestion. Try as I might, however, I can barely get it half way in before it plops back out.
Now, back to the 230 point advantage you receive as a reward for the color of your skin -- What could any sane person call that, if not an advantage?
You don't point out facts.
In conversations you have consistently whined that minority students, particularly Blacks, earn extra points on the SAT’s by virtue of indicating their racial identity. I dismissed the idea as not relevant because it was not specific to the topic being discussed. This has not been the first time a white racist here has made this claim So over the past couple of years, I took the opportunity to look for the facts.
There is plenty of information about SAT scores and minorities. But the most immediate hits from this type of search shows two types of sources.
1) Sources that discuss the score disparity on the SAT for minorities and discusses why it exists, how it has changed over time, and what still can be done to change it. These articles are from places like PBS and Inside Higher Ed.
2) Sources that discuss the bonus points that minority students of color receive or that highlight the point deductions that Asian students are subject to on the SAT’s. These articles are from places like The Conservative Treehouse and The Daily Stormer.
As a researcher who has over 30 years of experience, I have a slight advantage over others who have not had these years of experience. Especially in these days of search engines as opposed to going to libraries. However, if it clucks, regardless of whether you have training as a veterinarian you can probably figure out it’s a chicken.
Red flag # 1 The clearly partisan nature of the URL’s for the sites.
Red flag #2 The articles I read all discussed the same single study.
Red flag # 3 All the articles referred to a loosely named “Princeton University Study” without reference to any researchers, research institutes, journals that published the study, or title of the study.
Red flag # 4 No article linked to the actual study.
Red flag #5 The links that were provided were to other articles which made the same claims.
Red flag #6 The articles cited the same chunk of text (or paraphrased) without indication of where the actual text came from except that it is from a powerpoint presentation from someone named Ann Lee. The original article, from the Los Angeles Times, seems to be the first to discuss the powerpoint presentation and is linked to and/or cited by the others. A seemingly legitimate (unbiased) source it does not actually tell us who this Ann Lee is.
Red flag #7 The articles do not discuss the research. Rather, they discuss Ann Lee’s powerpoint presentation about the research.
Red flag #8 To find the actual research I had to stop following the path led by these articles and instead do an entire new search for the research itself. I was able to find the study and another related study by the same lead researchers easily once I stopped looking at these clearly partisan sites that were discussing the study. In other words, the articles citing the study as evidence actually made it hard for me to find the actual study itself by not giving the basic information on the study (authors, title, or link).
Red flag #9 Eventually, I came across one cite that was more neutral and provided relevant information. This was an article from The Daily Pennsylvanian which provides more information on this mysterious Ann Lee who it turns out “runs a college preparatory tutoring center in Arcadia, Calif.” This article also specifies the authors of the study “Thomas J. Espenshade, Chang Y. Chung and Joan L. Walling” and provides more details about their research by way of a description and a, unfortunately broken, link to the actual research.
Turns out, the actual study concludes the exact opposite of what Ann Lee’s powerpoint presentation concludes. In the “Princeton University Study” research, the authors reach three conclusions:
1) Colleges provide lots of preferences that benefit certain students and not others including legacy admissions; despite this,
2) affirmative action in admissions processes that only serve to benefit Black and Hispanic minorities, regardless of SAT scores, are the only ones that are surrounded in controversy; and
3) without these preferences for Blacks and Hispanics (because of the ways in which racial and socio-economic disparities intersect in the country at large), members of these groups would be disproportionately unable to be admitted to elite universities.
What the article actually says is:
"It is possible to convert the magnitude of these preferences to a common SAT metric. The bonus for African-American applicants is roughly equivalent to an extra 230 SAT points (on a 1600-point scale), to 185 points for Hispanics, 200 points for athletes, and 160 points for children of alumni. The Asian disadvantage is comparable to a loss of 50 SAT points."p. 1431
Where is the confusion between this research and Ann Lee’s powerpoint about the research? Ann Lee, the author of the LA Times article, and all those who cite that article and discuss Lee’s presentation misinterpret the study and assert some version of the following related to SAT scores:
"African Americans received a “bonus” of 230 points, Lee says…. “Hispanics received a bonus of 185 points.”
The disparity between the powerpoint presentation and the research is that there is no bonus points on the SAT but instead there are a combination of considerations that go into decision making to accept any person that applies to a college, one of which is the SAT.
So, no, minorities do not earn bonus points on the SAT.
Think of it this way. In decision making for entrance into college a student may submit SAT scores, demographic information, references, past experience relevant to academics, high school GPA, an essay or two, may get interviewed, and so forth. The reason all of these are required is because colleges, as they should, identify that a student is more than a single test score. The study shows that if all that mattered for Black and Hispanic minorities was the SAT, they would be disadvantaged in trying to get into elite colleges. That is in part because of the advantage that other groups have outside of their SAT scores (legacies for example) and from birth (high socio-economic status). But the reasons that other considerations are in place is because all students are more than their SAT scores. And all students should be given considerations, and are, that allow college admissions processes to balance out things that are out of the students’ control (from socio-economic status to having a bad day when you took the exam, to being a terrible test taker) to those that are more in the student’s control (personal essay, high school gpa, etc.) to demonstrate that student’s fit for the school.
In short, your consistent whining over 230 points is based on fake news and the 230 points do not exist.
IM why do you FOCUS on "ELITE COLLEGES--------most colleges are not elite. ----or---I am not sure which are the ELITE colleges. ----not my alma mater. ----yeah---it is fact that the ELITE colleges look with favor an million dollar endowments. -------I may not like it but do not consider it a SIGNIFICANT ISSUE
Well, speaking of "off topic", this thread went off the rails in a hurry.Yep . we have had three generations of blacks receiving the benefits of affirmative action. They receive a 230 point boost on their SAT scores compared to whites for college admissions and a 280 point boost compared to Asians. They also go to the head of the queue for jobs.It's also racist to disagree with a self-appointed self-vindicating black man like IM2 who hides in his own threads telling the world that the White Man is at fault for and to blame for every thing the Blacks have done to themselves.
Except blacks didn't do it to ourselves.
Sorry, Toolstain, but Whites didn't do it to ourselves either! Why do you keep insisting on apply standards from centuries old to modern situations! I just read an article on how a White woman in the late 19th century got hired at Harvard as an astro-cartographer despite everything built 100% against her. She did so by perseverance and applying herself, not whining and making childish demands. And she ended up proving herself as not just the equal to other men, but BETTER. Whatever happened in centuries past happened because it was natural at that time. Times change. Things evolve. That is the nature of things. Today we build a better building than we did 50 years ago, and that was better than 50 years before it. Humanity leans by MAKING mistakes. You learn what is right by doing what is wrong. Tons of Blacks today are succeeding in the world because they are going out and getting educated and COMPETING in the free market and winning, not whining, bitching, blaming and demanding based on issues long, long dead and past. Some people learn that you win by wining, not hiding behind rules and getting your critics blocked and silenced from voicing their pinions. What goes around comes around and now I see you too have paid the piper, a victim of your on machinations! HaHa
View attachment 272888
The problem here is that not enough avail themselves to the opportunities they DO have and that is entirely upon themselves. Go through life with a contempt for education and hard work and OF COURSE you won't qualify for college .
Black racists like to blame whites when blacks do not take advantage of the preferential treatment they are given, but the failure to take it is all theirs.
Whites have had 20 generations of AA. Blacks alone have never had preferences.
I will say, however, that it's always fun to see the complaints about how unfair the past 20 generations, or the last 230 years, were but when February rolls around I see a laundry list of great black men and women that, somehow, were able to rise above all that and defy the odds.
It would be even better if the list was longer, yes, rather than tolerate the belly aching about why it isn't
I've proven everything I have said. Just as I proved that blacks don't get 230 points on the SAT for being black.
No you didn't. Arguing with me is futile for you because you don't have the intellect to match me. I've been able to argue and get things changed.
"Intellect?" You mean like your "master's" degree when you often cannot even use good grammar and syntax in a sentence? Moron, arguing is futile with you because no fact fazes your opinion. You have ONE agenda, one dogged opinion, NO MATTER WHAT. If I don't put more effort behind my posts to you it is only because your topic is a NON-ISSUE of no interest to me. And if you have argued and gotten anything changed, it is only because, like affirmative action, 2008 housing rules that caused the subprime meltdown and a hundred other concessions to Blacks, they all have been given to just SHUT YOU BLACKS THE HELL UP.
Because of the 243 years of white racial preferences.
I've been able to argue and get things changed. Opinions from white losers don't phase me boy. .
Because of the 243 years of white racial preferences.
. . . and the dirty little secret that IMKnot perpetually hides is that in the history of the planet, in every civilization, the native culture has ALWAYS favored ITSELF. And if America had been founded by sea-faring Blacks who fought off the British and defeated the Indians then brought in European slaves to make their economy viable, they would have DONE ALL THE EXACT SAME THINGS.
The only thing Whites are guilty of is human nature shared by every person on this planet. We created our own country which was intended to favor ourselves just as every other country, nation and civilization ever existed intrinsically benefits itself most and it is just TOO BAD we didn't break our backs to make it more fair sooner to a bunch of whining babies.
I've proven everything I have said. Just as I proved that blacks don't get 230 points on the SAT for being black.
By saying this:
What the article actually says is:
"It is possible to convert the magnitude of these preferences to a common SAT metric. The bonus for African-American applicants is roughly equivalent to an extra 230 SAT points (on a 1600-point scale), to 185 points for Hispanics, 200 points for athletes, and 160 points for children of alumni. The Asian disadvantage is comparable to a loss of 50 SAT points."p. 1431
followed by obfuscation that amounted to nothing more than distinction without a difference. Notice the word "preference" ? ….and "bonus"?
You actually corroborated what I have been saying.
I've been able to argue and get things changed. Opinions from white losers don't phase me boy. .
Is that because you threaten whites with a "smackdown" like you did with me yesterday?
Affirmative action was implemented with the express intent of helping black people succeed and you are actually trying to argue that it isn't what it is and has always been.
Your hatred of white people is so intense, you cannot acknowledge the truth.
Because of the 243 years of white racial preferences.
. . . and the dirty little secret that IMKnot perpetually hides is that in the history of the planet, in every civilization, the native culture has ALWAYS favored ITSELF. And if America had been founded by sea-faring Blacks who fought off the British and defeated the Indians then brought in European slaves to make their economy viable, they would have DONE ALL THE EXACT SAME THINGS.
The only thing Whites are guilty of is human nature shared by every person on this planet. We created our own country which was intended to favor ourselves just as every other country, nation and civilization ever existed intrinsically benefits itself most and it is just TOO BAD we didn't break our backs to make it more fair sooner to a bunch of whining babies.
Affirmative action is the very system that was put in place to try to address that, and is the reality of the lives people are actually leading in the here and now.
They cling to the past because they need a handy excuse for their own failure.
It is a horrible self-fulfilling prophecy blacks have placed upon themselves. Any of their personal failure is somebody else's fault, they are perpetual victims even if they are the aggressors in a situation, and they don't need to take any responsibility for their actions because they have a ready made excuse. This attitude guarantees their very failure, so generation after generation passes on the self-destructive attitudes.
Many blacks rise above this and become men. They not only teach their children how to succeed, but how to avail themselves to all the systems in place that give them a leg up. Sadly, far too many remain children, and so only pass on their hatred of whites and sense of victimhood.
No you didn't. Arguing with me is futile for you because you don't have the intellect to match me. I've been able to argue and get things changed.
You never stop bitching, you never stop complaining ---- ---- if you actually ever went out and got a real job and had a successful life, you would have neither the time nor inclination to spend all day here bitching about your own race's laziness and stupidity. As far as intelligence, son, I skipped 7th grade, went through high school in 2.5 years at a private school and onto college on a scholarship. So, when I get idiots like you talking about intellect, I always ask them to answer me one question to prove it (it's really only a HIGH SCHOOL question!): Solve this, genius. It has two solutions. Name one or both ways that X can be expressed?
View attachment 272927
He is an obvious bully and all this violent imagery of his just his way of trying to intimidate white people online as he does in real life.You don't point out facts.Untrue.The one group it hurts most is Asians.
Ahem.
View attachment 272917
