Muons, Leptons and CRT

[LordBrownTrout]

Its laughable because it's all based on emotions and feelings. Glad Texas kicked it back into the dumpster where it belongs.

 

[kyzr]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

The "1619 Project" and CRT are not history they are ideology.
Their bogus history was refuted in "the President's Advisory 1776 Commission" report, written by real professors and historians, not stupid communist/racists.
A 40-page report was released January 21, 2021. Read it and learn the truth:

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

As expected, you're trying to weasel out of giving an answer, again. I asked a specific question, and had hoped that you would at least try to answer. I didn't ask for a 40 page reading assignment. If you can't give a credible answer, then admit you have no idea why you disagree instead of attempting such a childish stunt.

Here is the answer to your specific question:
The 1619 Project was published in NYT Magazine August 2019. It was an essay written by Nikole Hannah-Jones without any citations or references. It is simply incorrect, as documented and refuted by real historians. It is simply an amateurish attempt to "reframe history" and "decenter whiteness" according to the author. It is ideology pretending to be history.
Some of the unsubstantiated and simply incorrect claims include:
1. America was founded in 1619, not 1776
2. The reason for the American Revolution was to protect slavery
3. The US Constitution is anti-black
4. The founding ideals were all false
5. That slavery didn't exist until the US started it

The 1619 Project is nothing but a poorly written collection of racist lies.
That answers your question. There was no research, there are no citations, its total bullshit.

Nice shot, but wrong target. The 1619 project and Critical Race Theory are not the same thing. Similar, but not the same. I can repute much of what you wrote, but since we aren't talking about the 1619 project, I'll save that for another time. I still haven't been able to find any K/12 school that is teaching Critical Race Theory. Can you point a few out?

I know you don't like to do much reading, but if/when you get ambitious, you can read the links below to understand why we oppose the critical race theory, and how we can push back against it:
Critical Race Theory: What It Is and How to Fight It - Geller Report News

How To Disrupt Critical Race Theory Training | The American Conservative

Critical Race Theory in Education: How to Fight It | National Review

 

[kyzr]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

The "1619 Project" and CRT are not history they are ideology.
Their bogus history was refuted in "the President's Advisory 1776 Commission" report, written by real professors and historians, not stupid communist/racists.
A 40-page report was released January 21, 2021. Read it and learn the truth:

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

As expected, you're trying to weasel out of giving an answer, again. I asked a specific question, and had hoped that you would at least try to answer. I didn't ask for a 40 page reading assignment. If you can't give a credible answer, then admit you have no idea why you disagree instead of attempting such a childish stunt.

Here is the answer to your specific question:
The 1619 Project was published in NYT Magazine August 2019. It was an essay written by Nikole Hannah-Jones without any citations or references. It is simply incorrect, as documented and refuted by real historians. It is simply an amateurish attempt to "reframe history" and "decenter whiteness" according to the author. It is ideology pretending to be history.
Some of the unsubstantiated and simply incorrect claims include:
1. America was founded in 1619, not 1776
2. The reason for the American Revolution was to protect slavery
3. The US Constitution is anti-black
4. The founding ideals were all false
5. That slavery didn't exist until the US started it

The 1619 Project is nothing but a poorly written collection of racist lies.
That answers your question. There was no research, there are no citations, its total bullshit.

Nice shot, but wrong target. The 1619 project and Critical Race Theory are not the same thing. Similar, but not the same. I can repute much of what you wrote, but since we aren't talking about the 1619 project, I'll save that for another time. I still haven't been able to find any K/12 school that is teaching Critical Race Theory. Can you point a few out?

1. Here is a site that says it tracks where CRT is being taught:

New website tracks where critical race theory is taught at US schools

A Cornell Law School professor has launched a new website about critical race theory curriculum in the US — in hopes of educating “concerned” parents about how the controversial movemen…

nypost.com

2. I'm reading a book by an active duty AF officer, Matthew Lohmeier called "Irresistible Revolution". In it he documents the democrats attempted "communist" takeover of the US military by pushing CRT.

So no K/12 schools are teaching it. Why are you so upset about something that isn't happening? Are you so controlled by pundits till you will rant like that crazy lady at a school board meeting just because you were told to be mad about something that isn't happening? You should be embarrassed.

Yes, many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, especially in the urban plantations.
Here is one Chinese-American mom who recognizes it for what it is, "America's Cultural Revolution" and she is warning us that CRT needs to be stopped ASP.

Mom who survived Mao’s China calls critical race theory America’s Cultural Revolution

Xi Van Fleet said critical race theory “should have no place in our schools.”

nypost.com

Oh God.... Not another crazy lady at a school board meeting.

She is obviously a very smart lady. She documents the similarities between the Communist's "Cultural Revolution" that she lived thru and the CRT. The oppressed/oppressor narrative, etc. That is not crazy, that is fact. You keep trying to ignore the truth. Ignoring it won't make it go away. You apparently can't debate or refute the truth, but denial is not reality.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

All of history is subject to revision that is the nature of the beast. The issue here seems to be that some folk do not want history to be revised because it conflicts with their setttled world view.

In the UK we were taught about the wonders of empire and how amazing Britain was to hold moat of the world in subjugation. What we were not told about were the massacres, rapes,murders and theft that was done on an industrial scale. Slavery was never mentioned either.
The legacy of that drags us down today as many brits still have a superiority complex in regard to minorities. Bad history causing problems today.

It seems to be a similar case in the US. You have been taught a version of history that you are comfortable with and you dont want that changed in any way.

An earlier poster listed the sort of things he did not want to see revised.

1. America was founded in 1619, not 1776
Patently this is not the truth. You can argue the exact date to your hearts content, 1776 was the date you beat the british.
2. The reason for the American Revolution was to protect slavery
Well that was one of the reasons but not the whole reason.
3. The US Constitution is anti-black
The constitution did not recognise Blacks as actual people.
4. The founding ideals were all false
They were aspirational but hypocritical. A document praising freedom but an economy based on slavery. Hmmm.
5. That slavery didn't exist until the US started it
Well I have never seen that claim made. A straw man.

You cannot have a national narrative that fails to recognise the fact that Black folk suffered for centuries in A,merica. It is no longer possible.

The sooner that you calm down andengage in a respectful debate the sooner that you canmake progress. Its just the same over here.

This is absurd and ludicrous. The emancipation of slaves and a civil war has already been fought. Its akin to hoisting guilt on current germans who had nothing to do with the holocaust.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

The "1619 Project" and CRT are not history they are ideology.
Their bogus history was refuted in "the President's Advisory 1776 Commission" report, written by real professors and historians, not stupid communist/racists.
A 40-page report was released January 21, 2021. Read it and learn the truth:

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

As expected, you're trying to weasel out of giving an answer, again. I asked a specific question, and had hoped that you would at least try to answer. I didn't ask for a 40 page reading assignment. If you can't give a credible answer, then admit you have no idea why you disagree instead of attempting such a childish stunt.

Here is the answer to your specific question:
The 1619 Project was published in NYT Magazine August 2019. It was an essay written by Nikole Hannah-Jones without any citations or references. It is simply incorrect, as documented and refuted by real historians. It is simply an amateurish attempt to "reframe history" and "decenter whiteness" according to the author. It is ideology pretending to be history.
Some of the unsubstantiated and simply incorrect claims include:
1. America was founded in 1619, not 1776
2. The reason for the American Revolution was to protect slavery
3. The US Constitution is anti-black
4. The founding ideals were all false
5. That slavery didn't exist until the US started it

The 1619 Project is nothing but a poorly written collection of racist lies.
That answers your question. There was no research, there are no citations, its total bullshit.

Nice shot, but wrong target. The 1619 project and Critical Race Theory are not the same thing. Similar, but not the same. I can repute much of what you wrote, but since we aren't talking about the 1619 project, I'll save that for another time. I still haven't been able to find any K/12 school that is teaching Critical Race Theory. Can you point a few out?

1. Here is a site that says it tracks where CRT is being taught:

New website tracks where critical race theory is taught at US schools

A Cornell Law School professor has launched a new website about critical race theory curriculum in the US — in hopes of educating “concerned” parents about how the controversial movemen…

nypost.com

2. I'm reading a book by an active duty AF officer, Matthew Lohmeier called "Irresistible Revolution". In it he documents the democrats attempted "communist" takeover of the US military by pushing CRT.

So no K/12 schools are teaching it. Why are you so upset about something that isn't happening? Are you so controlled by pundits till you will rant like that crazy lady at a school board meeting just because you were told to be mad about something that isn't happening? You should be embarrassed.

Yes, many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, especially in the urban plantations.
Here is one Chinese-American mom who recognizes it for what it is, "America's Cultural Revolution" and she is warning us that CRT needs to be stopped ASP.

Mom who survived Mao’s China calls critical race theory America’s Cultural Revolution

Xi Van Fleet said critical race theory “should have no place in our schools.”

nypost.com

Oh God.... Not another crazy lady at a school board meeting.
If many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, then name at least one.

I don’t know which, if any, schools are teaching CRT but even if none are at the moment, there is a movement by certain groups to teach it. That’s what opponents of teaching CRT are arguing against.

 

[NightFox]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

The "1619 Project" and CRT are not history they are ideology.
Their bogus history was refuted in "the President's Advisory 1776 Commission" report, written by real professors and historians, not stupid communist/racists.
A 40-page report was released January 21, 2021. Read it and learn the truth:

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

As expected, you're trying to weasel out of giving an answer, again. I asked a specific question, and had hoped that you would at least try to answer. I didn't ask for a 40 page reading assignment. If you can't give a credible answer, then admit you have no idea why you disagree instead of attempting such a childish stunt.

Here is the answer to your specific question:
The 1619 Project was published in NYT Magazine August 2019. It was an essay written by Nikole Hannah-Jones without any citations or references. It is simply incorrect, as documented and refuted by real historians. It is simply an amateurish attempt to "reframe history" and "decenter whiteness" according to the author. It is ideology pretending to be history.
Some of the unsubstantiated and simply incorrect claims include:
1. America was founded in 1619, not 1776
2. The reason for the American Revolution was to protect slavery
3. The US Constitution is anti-black
4. The founding ideals were all false
5. That slavery didn't exist until the US started it

The 1619 Project is nothing but a poorly written collection of racist lies.
That answers your question. There was no research, there are no citations, its total bullshit.

Nice shot, but wrong target. The 1619 project and Critical Race Theory are not the same thing. Similar, but not the same. I can repute much of what you wrote, but since we aren't talking about the 1619 project, I'll save that for another time. I still haven't been able to find any K/12 school that is teaching Critical Race Theory. Can you point a few out?

1. Here is a site that says it tracks where CRT is being taught:

New website tracks where critical race theory is taught at US schools

A Cornell Law School professor has launched a new website about critical race theory curriculum in the US — in hopes of educating “concerned” parents about how the controversial movemen…

nypost.com

2. I'm reading a book by an active duty AF officer, Matthew Lohmeier called "Irresistible Revolution". In it he documents the democrats attempted "communist" takeover of the US military by pushing CRT.

So no K/12 schools are teaching it. Why are you so upset about something that isn't happening? Are you so controlled by pundits till you will rant like that crazy lady at a school board meeting just because you were told to be mad about something that isn't happening? You should be embarrassed.

Yes, many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, especially in the urban plantations.
Here is one Chinese-American mom who recognizes it for what it is, "America's Cultural Revolution" and she is warning us that CRT needs to be stopped ASP.

Mom who survived Mao’s China calls critical race theory America’s Cultural Revolution

Xi Van Fleet said critical race theory “should have no place in our schools.”

nypost.com

Oh God.... Not another crazy lady at a school board meeting.
If many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, then name at least one.

I don’t know which, if any, schools are teaching CRT but even if none are at the moment, there is a movement by certain groups to teach it. That’s what opponents of teaching CRT are arguing against.

As far as I know it’s currently being taught only at Universities, which is fine as long as it’s presented for what it is, an argument based on opinions. You’re right though there has been a push in certain districts to teach it in primary education, which is why some states are moving to stop it in its tracks before it gets there.

 

[BULLDOG]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

You do realize that Critical Race Theory wasn’t developed via any generally accepted scientific method, right? It was just a bunch of legal scholars putting together opinions based on historical data and legal arguments. It really doesn’t deserve the moniker of “theory” and should be title “Critical Race ARGUMENT”. There is no reasonable justification for this to be taught to children in school, it’s tantamount to teaching an ideology.

IMHO Teachers need to stick to facts not opinions, especially NOT opinions that carry significant risk of engendering self loathing, resentment and disharmony among children.

which of those historical data and legal arguments are flawed? This should be easy if you really know what you are talking about.

What difference does that make? It’s still not a “theory” it’s an argument and should be treated as such, i.e. should NOT be taught in schools to children.

Anyone can cherry pick a bunch of historical facts and legal arguments, form an opinion based on them and call it a “theory”, does that mean that it should be taught to children and presented as fact? There’s nothing wrong with teaching the historical facts that underly CRT individually but when you start teaching an ARGUMENT as some sort of scientific product AND that has so many potential negative side effects on children, you’ve stepped WAY over the line.

It makes a lot of difference. You've got your panties in a knot, and don't even know why. Right wing pundits told you to be upset about it. They didn't tell you, and you don't know why. That doesn't make you feel at least a little dumb?

LOL, you appear to be the one that’s got “your panties in knot”, you haven’t presented a single credible argument that defends CRT and why it should be taught to children in school, all you’ve done is attempt to obfuscate by sticking your fingers in your ears while chanting the same MEANINGLESS rebuttal along with adding in some nonsense about “right wing pundits”.

I suspect that you have absolutely NO idea what the history and foundations of the CRT are, which is why you are totally inept when it comes to defending it.

Allow me to take a wild stab at what you’ll attempt next in your silly non-argument, you’ll call me some sort of “Trumpster” and then attempt to discount my argument on that basis, am I correct?

Woah there buddy. I didn't start this thread complaining about Critical Race Theory, and I haven't advocated for it. Right wingers are extremely upset over it, and I'm just asking why. If you are that upset, you should be able to explain why, right? If you can't say exactly why it upsets you so much, then it looks like you are just mad because you were told to be mad.

Woah there back at you, you didn’t start the thread, you just jumped in and criticized the premise of the OP without offering up an alternative argument and then when I pointed out the error of your ways, you doubled down with your non-argument along with intimating some non-sequitur BS regarding “right wing pundits”.

So let’s be clear are you DEFENDING the CRT as an actual “theory” that should be taught to children in schools or are you not? If you are defending the CRT and it’s teaching to children in schools, then present your argument based on reason and evidence, so far you haven’t done that.

As far as me being “upset”, there’s a HUGE difference between me being “upset” and me disagreeing with a point of view and explaining my reasons for disagreement.

I don't think I've told anybody they were wrong.

Fair enough, so you’re not defending the CRT then? If that’s the case I apologize for misreading your motive.

I'm just asking you to explain your point of view. So far, nobody has done that.

Excuse Me? I DID explain my point of view, however your responses so far have been underwhelming to say the least.

Lots of people are saying it is wrong, but cant point out specifically what part is wrong,

I never said it was wrong, what I said is that it isn’t a theory it’s an argument and I explained why I believed that was the case, and then pointed out why it shouldn’t be taught to school children.

I also pointed out why I believe your initial question regarding its underpinnings was irrelevant given the fact that it’s an argument not theory.

What more do you want?

To be clear, your opposition is because you don't believe we should teach beliefs of legal scholars putting together opinions based on historical data and legal arguments? You realize that is the full curriculum of every law school in the country, if not the world, don't you? Since it isn't being taught in any K/12 school in the country, why do you oppose it being taught in law school?

 

[Penelope]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Isn't Christianity a theory and ideology??

We are talking history here, so you might not like it, but its history.

 

[beagle9]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

You do realize that Critical Race Theory wasn’t developed via any generally accepted scientific method, right? It was just a bunch of legal scholars putting together opinions based on historical data and legal arguments. It really doesn’t deserve the moniker of “theory” and should be title “Critical Race ARGUMENT”. There is no reasonable justification for this to be taught to children in school, it’s tantamount to teaching an ideology.

IMHO Teachers need to stick to facts not opinions, especially NOT opinions that carry significant risk of engendering self loathing, resentment and disharmony among children.

which of those historical data and legal arguments are flawed? This should be easy if you really know what you are talking about.

What difference does that make? It’s still not a “theory” it’s an argument and should be treated as such, i.e. should NOT be taught in schools to children.

Anyone can cherry pick a bunch of historical facts and legal arguments, form an opinion based on them and call it a “theory”, does that mean that it should be taught to children and presented as fact? There’s nothing wrong with teaching the historical facts that underly CRT individually but when you start teaching an ARGUMENT as some sort of scientific product AND that has so many potential negative side effects on children, you’ve stepped WAY over the line.

Critical race theory is a hypotheses.

A hypothesis that shouldn't be taught in public schools period.

 

[NightFox]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

You do realize that Critical Race Theory wasn’t developed via any generally accepted scientific method, right? It was just a bunch of legal scholars putting together opinions based on historical data and legal arguments. It really doesn’t deserve the moniker of “theory” and should be title “Critical Race ARGUMENT”. There is no reasonable justification for this to be taught to children in school, it’s tantamount to teaching an ideology.

IMHO Teachers need to stick to facts not opinions, especially NOT opinions that carry significant risk of engendering self loathing, resentment and disharmony among children.

which of those historical data and legal arguments are flawed? This should be easy if you really know what you are talking about.

What difference does that make? It’s still not a “theory” it’s an argument and should be treated as such, i.e. should NOT be taught in schools to children.

Anyone can cherry pick a bunch of historical facts and legal arguments, form an opinion based on them and call it a “theory”, does that mean that it should be taught to children and presented as fact? There’s nothing wrong with teaching the historical facts that underly CRT individually but when you start teaching an ARGUMENT as some sort of scientific product AND that has so many potential negative side effects on children, you’ve stepped WAY over the line.

It makes a lot of difference. You've got your panties in a knot, and don't even know why. Right wing pundits told you to be upset about it. They didn't tell you, and you don't know why. That doesn't make you feel at least a little dumb?

LOL, you appear to be the one that’s got “your panties in knot”, you haven’t presented a single credible argument that defends CRT and why it should be taught to children in school, all you’ve done is attempt to obfuscate by sticking your fingers in your ears while chanting the same MEANINGLESS rebuttal along with adding in some nonsense about “right wing pundits”.

I suspect that you have absolutely NO idea what the history and foundations of the CRT are, which is why you are totally inept when it comes to defending it.

Allow me to take a wild stab at what you’ll attempt next in your silly non-argument, you’ll call me some sort of “Trumpster” and then attempt to discount my argument on that basis, am I correct?

Woah there buddy. I didn't start this thread complaining about Critical Race Theory, and I haven't advocated for it. Right wingers are extremely upset over it, and I'm just asking why. If you are that upset, you should be able to explain why, right? If you can't say exactly why it upsets you so much, then it looks like you are just mad because you were told to be mad.

Woah there back at you, you didn’t start the thread, you just jumped in and criticized the premise of the OP without offering up an alternative argument and then when I pointed out the error of your ways, you doubled down with your non-argument along with intimating some non-sequitur BS regarding “right wing pundits”.

So let’s be clear are you DEFENDING the CRT as an actual “theory” that should be taught to children in schools or are you not? If you are defending the CRT and it’s teaching to children in schools, then present your argument based on reason and evidence, so far you haven’t done that.

As far as me being “upset”, there’s a HUGE difference between me being “upset” and me disagreeing with a point of view and explaining my reasons for disagreement.

I don't think I've told anybody they were wrong.

Fair enough, so you’re not defending the CRT then? If that’s the case I apologize for misreading your motive.

I'm just asking you to explain your point of view. So far, nobody has done that.

Excuse Me? I DID explain my point of view, however your responses so far have been underwhelming to say the least.

Lots of people are saying it is wrong, but cant point out specifically what part is wrong,

I never said it was wrong, what I said is that it isn’t a theory it’s an argument and I explained why I believed that was the case, and then pointed out why it shouldn’t be taught to school children.

I also pointed out why I believe your initial question regarding its underpinnings was irrelevant given the fact that it’s an argument not theory.

What more do you want?

To be clear, your opposition is because you don't believe we should teach beliefs of legal scholars putting together opinions based on historical data and legal arguments?

Yeah, it should NOT be taught to CHILDREN (for the UMPTEENTH TIME) in schools and presented as fact, I have given you the reasons why I believe that, do you disagree with them? If so why?

You realize that is the full curriculum of every law school in the country, if not the world, don't you? Since it isn't being taught in any K/12 school in the country, why do you oppose it being taught in law school?

Er.. umm it’s taught at the University level to YOUNG ADULTS and that isn’t where the controversy lies, it’s the push to teach it in school to CHILDREN.

You’re attempting to redefine my argument and the issue at hand, NOT GOING TO WORK.

 

[beagle9]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Isn't Christianity a theory and ideology??

We are talking history here, so you might not like it, but its history.

Christianity is proven, so it's not a theory. It's been proven to work here, and it's been proven a truth that is well accepted around the world in various forms.

 

[Crepitus]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Can you explain what critical race theory is?

 

[BULLDOG]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

The "1619 Project" and CRT are not history they are ideology.
Their bogus history was refuted in "the President's Advisory 1776 Commission" report, written by real professors and historians, not stupid communist/racists.
A 40-page report was released January 21, 2021. Read it and learn the truth:

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

As expected, you're trying to weasel out of giving an answer, again. I asked a specific question, and had hoped that you would at least try to answer. I didn't ask for a 40 page reading assignment. If you can't give a credible answer, then admit you have no idea why you disagree instead of attempting such a childish stunt.

Here is the answer to your specific question:
The 1619 Project was published in NYT Magazine August 2019. It was an essay written by Nikole Hannah-Jones without any citations or references. It is simply incorrect, as documented and refuted by real historians. It is simply an amateurish attempt to "reframe history" and "decenter whiteness" according to the author. It is ideology pretending to be history.
Some of the unsubstantiated and simply incorrect claims include:
1. America was founded in 1619, not 1776
2. The reason for the American Revolution was to protect slavery
3. The US Constitution is anti-black
4. The founding ideals were all false
5. That slavery didn't exist until the US started it

The 1619 Project is nothing but a poorly written collection of racist lies.
That answers your question. There was no research, there are no citations, its total bullshit.

Nice shot, but wrong target. The 1619 project and Critical Race Theory are not the same thing. Similar, but not the same. I can repute much of what you wrote, but since we aren't talking about the 1619 project, I'll save that for another time. I still haven't been able to find any K/12 school that is teaching Critical Race Theory. Can you point a few out?

1. Here is a site that says it tracks where CRT is being taught:

New website tracks where critical race theory is taught at US schools

A Cornell Law School professor has launched a new website about critical race theory curriculum in the US — in hopes of educating “concerned” parents about how the controversial movemen…

nypost.com

2. I'm reading a book by an active duty AF officer, Matthew Lohmeier called "Irresistible Revolution". In it he documents the democrats attempted "communist" takeover of the US military by pushing CRT.

So no K/12 schools are teaching it. Why are you so upset about something that isn't happening? Are you so controlled by pundits till you will rant like that crazy lady at a school board meeting just because you were told to be mad about something that isn't happening? You should be embarrassed.

Yes, many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, especially in the urban plantations.
Here is one Chinese-American mom who recognizes it for what it is, "America's Cultural Revolution" and she is warning us that CRT needs to be stopped ASP.

Mom who survived Mao’s China calls critical race theory America’s Cultural Revolution

Xi Van Fleet said critical race theory “should have no place in our schools.”

nypost.com

Oh God.... Not another crazy lady at a school board meeting.

She is obviously a very smart lady. She documents the similarities between the Communist's "Cultural Revolution" that she lived thru and the CRT. The oppressed/oppressor narrative, etc. That is not crazy, that is fact. You keep trying to ignore the truth. Ignoring it won't make it go away. You apparently can't debate or refute the truth, but denial is not reality.

She's just another crazy lady at a school board meeting. That's all.

 

[Crepitus]

Christianity is proven,

Lol, whut?

 

[beagle9]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

The "1619 Project" and CRT are not history they are ideology.
Their bogus history was refuted in "the President's Advisory 1776 Commission" report, written by real professors and historians, not stupid communist/racists.
A 40-page report was released January 21, 2021. Read it and learn the truth:

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

As expected, you're trying to weasel out of giving an answer, again. I asked a specific question, and had hoped that you would at least try to answer. I didn't ask for a 40 page reading assignment. If you can't give a credible answer, then admit you have no idea why you disagree instead of attempting such a childish stunt.

Here is the answer to your specific question:
The 1619 Project was published in NYT Magazine August 2019. It was an essay written by Nikole Hannah-Jones without any citations or references. It is simply incorrect, as documented and refuted by real historians. It is simply an amateurish attempt to "reframe history" and "decenter whiteness" according to the author. It is ideology pretending to be history.
Some of the unsubstantiated and simply incorrect claims include:
1. America was founded in 1619, not 1776
2. The reason for the American Revolution was to protect slavery
3. The US Constitution is anti-black
4. The founding ideals were all false
5. That slavery didn't exist until the US started it

The 1619 Project is nothing but a poorly written collection of racist lies.
That answers your question. There was no research, there are no citations, its total bullshit.

Nice shot, but wrong target. The 1619 project and Critical Race Theory are not the same thing. Similar, but not the same. I can repute much of what you wrote, but since we aren't talking about the 1619 project, I'll save that for another time. I still haven't been able to find any K/12 school that is teaching Critical Race Theory. Can you point a few out?

1. Here is a site that says it tracks where CRT is being taught:

New website tracks where critical race theory is taught at US schools

A Cornell Law School professor has launched a new website about critical race theory curriculum in the US — in hopes of educating “concerned” parents about how the controversial movemen…

nypost.com

2. I'm reading a book by an active duty AF officer, Matthew Lohmeier called "Irresistible Revolution". In it he documents the democrats attempted "communist" takeover of the US military by pushing CRT.

So no K/12 schools are teaching it. Why are you so upset about something that isn't happening? Are you so controlled by pundits till you will rant like that crazy lady at a school board meeting just because you were told to be mad about something that isn't happening? You should be embarrassed.

Yes, many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, especially in the urban plantations.
Here is one Chinese-American mom who recognizes it for what it is, "America's Cultural Revolution" and she is warning us that CRT needs to be stopped ASP.

Mom who survived Mao’s China calls critical race theory America’s Cultural Revolution

Xi Van Fleet said critical race theory “should have no place in our schools.”

nypost.com

Oh God.... Not another crazy lady at a school board meeting.
If many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, then name at least one.

I don’t know which, if any, schools are teaching CRT but even if none are at the moment, there is a movement by certain groups to teach it. That’s what opponents of teaching CRT are arguing against.

Yep, and they will end that argument with a unified NO on teaching junk social experimentation's in the school's or inside the classroom's to their children. In fact alot of school board member's who have violated the parent's trust should be removed immediately.

 

[BULLDOG]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

The "1619 Project" and CRT are not history they are ideology.
Their bogus history was refuted in "the President's Advisory 1776 Commission" report, written by real professors and historians, not stupid communist/racists.
A 40-page report was released January 21, 2021. Read it and learn the truth:

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

As expected, you're trying to weasel out of giving an answer, again. I asked a specific question, and had hoped that you would at least try to answer. I didn't ask for a 40 page reading assignment. If you can't give a credible answer, then admit you have no idea why you disagree instead of attempting such a childish stunt.

Here is the answer to your specific question:
The 1619 Project was published in NYT Magazine August 2019. It was an essay written by Nikole Hannah-Jones without any citations or references. It is simply incorrect, as documented and refuted by real historians. It is simply an amateurish attempt to "reframe history" and "decenter whiteness" according to the author. It is ideology pretending to be history.
Some of the unsubstantiated and simply incorrect claims include:
1. America was founded in 1619, not 1776
2. The reason for the American Revolution was to protect slavery
3. The US Constitution is anti-black
4. The founding ideals were all false
5. That slavery didn't exist until the US started it

The 1619 Project is nothing but a poorly written collection of racist lies.
That answers your question. There was no research, there are no citations, its total bullshit.

Nice shot, but wrong target. The 1619 project and Critical Race Theory are not the same thing. Similar, but not the same. I can repute much of what you wrote, but since we aren't talking about the 1619 project, I'll save that for another time. I still haven't been able to find any K/12 school that is teaching Critical Race Theory. Can you point a few out?

1. Here is a site that says it tracks where CRT is being taught:

New website tracks where critical race theory is taught at US schools

A Cornell Law School professor has launched a new website about critical race theory curriculum in the US — in hopes of educating “concerned” parents about how the controversial movemen…

nypost.com

2. I'm reading a book by an active duty AF officer, Matthew Lohmeier called "Irresistible Revolution". In it he documents the democrats attempted "communist" takeover of the US military by pushing CRT.

So no K/12 schools are teaching it. Why are you so upset about something that isn't happening? Are you so controlled by pundits till you will rant like that crazy lady at a school board meeting just because you were told to be mad about something that isn't happening? You should be embarrassed.

Yes, many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, especially in the urban plantations.
Here is one Chinese-American mom who recognizes it for what it is, "America's Cultural Revolution" and she is warning us that CRT needs to be stopped ASP.

Mom who survived Mao’s China calls critical race theory America’s Cultural Revolution

Xi Van Fleet said critical race theory “should have no place in our schools.”

nypost.com

Oh God.... Not another crazy lady at a school board meeting.
If many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, then name at least one.

I don’t know which, if any, schools are teaching CRT but even if none are at the moment, there is a movement by certain groups to teach it. That’s what opponents of teaching CRT are arguing against.

No. They are upset because they were told to be upset. Just like they were upset about FEMA prisons, Walmart tunnels, and the military attacking Texas. Upset crazies don't lose interest and forget to vote in the next election. When this fades, there will be another batshit crazy thing for them to be upset about.

There are no K/12 schools teaching it.

 

[NightFox]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Isn't Christianity a theory and ideology??

No, Christianity ISN’T a theory but it is an ideology, the two concepts are mutually exclusive if one takes into account that “theory” carries with it the notion of being derived via the scientific method in most peoples minds thus to characterize Christianity as a theory would be highly misleading.

We are talking history here, so you might not like it, but its history.

No, with CRT you’re not “talking history” you’re talking an argument based on opinions formulated by cherry picking historical facts and legal arguments in isolation.

Teach the history to children, leaving the aggregated and highly suggestive opinions out of it.

 

[BULLDOG]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

The "1619 Project" and CRT are not history they are ideology.
Their bogus history was refuted in "the President's Advisory 1776 Commission" report, written by real professors and historians, not stupid communist/racists.
A 40-page report was released January 21, 2021. Read it and learn the truth:

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

As expected, you're trying to weasel out of giving an answer, again. I asked a specific question, and had hoped that you would at least try to answer. I didn't ask for a 40 page reading assignment. If you can't give a credible answer, then admit you have no idea why you disagree instead of attempting such a childish stunt.

Here is the answer to your specific question:
The 1619 Project was published in NYT Magazine August 2019. It was an essay written by Nikole Hannah-Jones without any citations or references. It is simply incorrect, as documented and refuted by real historians. It is simply an amateurish attempt to "reframe history" and "decenter whiteness" according to the author. It is ideology pretending to be history.
Some of the unsubstantiated and simply incorrect claims include:
1. America was founded in 1619, not 1776
2. The reason for the American Revolution was to protect slavery
3. The US Constitution is anti-black
4. The founding ideals were all false
5. That slavery didn't exist until the US started it

The 1619 Project is nothing but a poorly written collection of racist lies.
That answers your question. There was no research, there are no citations, its total bullshit.

Nice shot, but wrong target. The 1619 project and Critical Race Theory are not the same thing. Similar, but not the same. I can repute much of what you wrote, but since we aren't talking about the 1619 project, I'll save that for another time. I still haven't been able to find any K/12 school that is teaching Critical Race Theory. Can you point a few out?

1. Here is a site that says it tracks where CRT is being taught:

New website tracks where critical race theory is taught at US schools

A Cornell Law School professor has launched a new website about critical race theory curriculum in the US — in hopes of educating “concerned” parents about how the controversial movemen…

nypost.com

2. I'm reading a book by an active duty AF officer, Matthew Lohmeier called "Irresistible Revolution". In it he documents the democrats attempted "communist" takeover of the US military by pushing CRT.

So no K/12 schools are teaching it. Why are you so upset about something that isn't happening? Are you so controlled by pundits till you will rant like that crazy lady at a school board meeting just because you were told to be mad about something that isn't happening? You should be embarrassed.

Yes, many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, especially in the urban plantations.
Here is one Chinese-American mom who recognizes it for what it is, "America's Cultural Revolution" and she is warning us that CRT needs to be stopped ASP.

Mom who survived Mao’s China calls critical race theory America’s Cultural Revolution

Xi Van Fleet said critical race theory “should have no place in our schools.”

nypost.com

Oh God.... Not another crazy lady at a school board meeting.
If many K/12 schools are teaching CRT, then name at least one.

I don’t know which, if any, schools are teaching CRT but even if none are at the moment, there is a movement by certain groups to teach it. That’s what opponents of teaching CRT are arguing against.

As far as I know it’s currently being taught only at Universities, which is fine as long as it’s presented for what it is, an argument based on opinions. You’re right though there has been a push in certain districts to teach it in primary education, which is why some states are moving to stop it in its tracks before it gets there.

Which districts? Credible link?

 

[beagle9]

Christianity is proven,

Lol, whut?

Don't what me boy. All you have to do is go back and weigh the consequences along with the positives verse's negatives in outcomes surrounding Christianity, and you will have your answer. Christianity on the scale will be proven the better when it comes to positives verse's the negatives in outcomes.

 

[BULLDOG]

Physics requires proof, by observation and provable facts. Critical race theory is junk assertions and no science. Higgs Bosons? Ok. But critical race theory is subjective political junk ideology hidden behind unintelligible pseudo intellectual claptrap pretending to be science.

Really? Have you looked at the research that went into developing the critical race theory? Which part, of that research was flawed, and why? Just saying you disagree with the conclusions is not an answer. I'm asking why you disagree.

You do realize that Critical Race Theory wasn’t developed via any generally accepted scientific method, right? It was just a bunch of legal scholars putting together opinions based on historical data and legal arguments. It really doesn’t deserve the moniker of “theory” and should be title “Critical Race ARGUMENT”. There is no reasonable justification for this to be taught to children in school, it’s tantamount to teaching an ideology.

IMHO Teachers need to stick to facts not opinions, especially NOT opinions that carry significant risk of engendering self loathing, resentment and disharmony among children.

which of those historical data and legal arguments are flawed? This should be easy if you really know what you are talking about.

What difference does that make? It’s still not a “theory” it’s an argument and should be treated as such, i.e. should NOT be taught in schools to children.

Anyone can cherry pick a bunch of historical facts and legal arguments, form an opinion based on them and call it a “theory”, does that mean that it should be taught to children and presented as fact? There’s nothing wrong with teaching the historical facts that underly CRT individually but when you start teaching an ARGUMENT as some sort of scientific product AND that has so many potential negative side effects on children, you’ve stepped WAY over the line.

It makes a lot of difference. You've got your panties in a knot, and don't even know why. Right wing pundits told you to be upset about it. They didn't tell you, and you don't know why. That doesn't make you feel at least a little dumb?

LOL, you appear to be the one that’s got “your panties in knot”, you haven’t presented a single credible argument that defends CRT and why it should be taught to children in school, all you’ve done is attempt to obfuscate by sticking your fingers in your ears while chanting the same MEANINGLESS rebuttal along with adding in some nonsense about “right wing pundits”.

I suspect that you have absolutely NO idea what the history and foundations of the CRT are, which is why you are totally inept when it comes to defending it.

Allow me to take a wild stab at what you’ll attempt next in your silly non-argument, you’ll call me some sort of “Trumpster” and then attempt to discount my argument on that basis, am I correct?

Woah there buddy. I didn't start this thread complaining about Critical Race Theory, and I haven't advocated for it. Right wingers are extremely upset over it, and I'm just asking why. If you are that upset, you should be able to explain why, right? If you can't say exactly why it upsets you so much, then it looks like you are just mad because you were told to be mad.

Woah there back at you, you didn’t start the thread, you just jumped in and criticized the premise of the OP without offering up an alternative argument and then when I pointed out the error of your ways, you doubled down with your non-argument along with intimating some non-sequitur BS regarding “right wing pundits”.

So let’s be clear are you DEFENDING the CRT as an actual “theory” that should be taught to children in schools or are you not? If you are defending the CRT and it’s teaching to children in schools, then present your argument based on reason and evidence, so far you haven’t done that.

As far as me being “upset”, there’s a HUGE difference between me being “upset” and me disagreeing with a point of view and explaining my reasons for disagreement.

I don't think I've told anybody they were wrong.

Fair enough, so you’re not defending the CRT then? If that’s the case I apologize for misreading your motive.

I'm just asking you to explain your point of view. So far, nobody has done that.

Excuse Me? I DID explain my point of view, however your responses so far have been underwhelming to say the least.

Lots of people are saying it is wrong, but cant point out specifically what part is wrong,

I never said it was wrong, what I said is that it isn’t a theory it’s an argument and I explained why I believed that was the case, and then pointed out why it shouldn’t be taught to school children.

I also pointed out why I believe your initial question regarding its underpinnings was irrelevant given the fact that it’s an argument not theory.

What more do you want?

To be clear, your opposition is because you don't believe we should teach beliefs of legal scholars putting together opinions based on historical data and legal arguments?

Yeah, it should NOT be taught to CHILDREN (for the UMPTEENTH TIME) in schools and presented as fact, I have given you the reasons why I believe that, do you disagree with them? If so why?

You realize that is the full curriculum of every law school in the country, if not the world, don't you? Since it isn't being taught in any K/12 school in the country, why do you oppose it being taught in law school?

Er.. umm it’s taught at the University level to YOUNG ADULTS and that isn’t where the controversy lies, it’s the push to teach it in school to CHILDREN.

You’re attempting to redefine my argument and the issue at hand, NOT GOING TO WORK.

Where is it being pushed to teach to children? Credible link?