The results of women voting

[Norman]

What is accurate that low status gammas always put ego before facts.

It is completely and utterly ridiculous to think this is correlation without causation. Women VOTE for big government leftists, that's why.

Even if this is true, there would not have been an immediate change in spending due to women voting. It would have taken time. Are you also crediting women for the revenue increase that happened at the same time.

Trouble with graphs? It's 10 years...

 

[Questioner]

Most people have been propagandized into being science deniers.

Bigger brains put men ahead of women in the IQ stakes

IQ isn't a part of the "natural sciences", as in Bacon's Inductive Method, so this again just seems to be popular misinformation as to what "science" is to begin with, what it means, where it's relevant, and so on.

"Averages" don't apply to individual 'outliers' so to speak, a woman like Marie Curie obviously had a high level of intelligence, so abusing averages or what they actually "mean" or are used for to begin with for the sake of petty identitarianism is a futile endeavor.

 

[Questioner]

After women vote government expenditure exploded on our faces like an atom bomb. Golfing Gator g5000 comments?

There is an old saying that is very true...correlation does not imply causation

Ahhh those old sayings...scientifically accurate in all aspects.

This one is.

What is accurate is that low status gammas always put ego before facts.

It is completely and utterly ridiculous to think this is correlation without causation. Women VOTE for big government leftists, that's why. The only question was how big the effect is. Don't repeat your old falsehoods / lies as if they haven't been debunked.

Blah blah blah, read Margaret Thatcher and shut to f-k up.

You don't even know what your government is or how it works anyway.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No it isnt. Its an old chat room saying.

No, it is what all students are taught on day one of Stats 101. Because most are as stupid as you can assume one means the other.

Correlation and causation is the only way anything works..the only way humans build patterns.
When you were a child and burnt your hand did your mom say "reach back up there to the stove silly....correlation does not imply causation but you are so cute"?

Correlation can lead to causation, but it is not implied and it is not guaranteed.

Here is an example Correlation does not mean causation

 

[Norman]

Most people have been propagandized into being science deniers.

Bigger brains put men ahead of women in the IQ stakes

IQ isn't a part of the "natural sciences", as in Bacon's Inductive Method, so this again just seems to be popular misinformation as to what "science" is to begin with, what it means, where it's relevant, and so on.

"Averages" don't apply to individual 'outliers' so to speak, a woman like Marie Curie obviously had a high level of intelligence, so abusing averages or what they actually "mean" or are used for to begin with for the sake of petty identitarianism is a futile endeavor.

IQ is one of the most reliable predictors in social science. Individuals are not outliers either. It sounds like you have no clue. No one is talking about individuals here, so why do you insist talking about individuals?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What is accurate that low status gammas always put ego before facts.

It is completely and utterly ridiculous to think this is correlation without causation. Women VOTE for big government leftists, that's why.

Even if this is true, there would not have been an immediate change in spending due to women voting. It would have taken time. Are you also crediting women for the revenue increase that happened at the same time.

Trouble with graphs? It's 10 years...

Yes, it is 10 years and the uptick started at year 1. Are you too stupid to understand your own graph?

 

[Questioner]

Most people have been propagandized into being science deniers.

Bigger brains put men ahead of women in the IQ stakes

IQ isn't a part of the "natural sciences", as in Bacon's Inductive Method, so this again just seems to be popular misinformation as to what "science" is to begin with, what it means, where it's relevant, and so on.

"Averages" don't apply to individual 'outliers' so to speak, a woman like Marie Curie obviously had a high level of intelligence, so abusing averages or what they actually "mean" or are used for to begin with for the sake of petty identitarianism is a futile endeavor.

IQ is one of the most reliable predictors in social science. Individuals are not outliers either. It sounds like you have no clue. No one is talking about individuals here, so why do you insist talking about individuals?

I have higher IQ than you, so who cares anyway? You've already lost the genetic lottery. Many of the social sciences and their methodologies are a bit archaic, holdovers from the 19th century, and not entirely applicable in the real world outside of abstraction and speculation. Arguably inferior to emotional intelligence in many regards, as per intelligence experts like Daniel Goleman.

Tell me, what IQ averages actually mean in practice; they're just mathematical abstractions which compare specific individuals side by side within the context of a specific study; they don't apply, in practice to men and women whom the average doesn't fit; such as Marie Curie obviously having a very high IQ; with the "average" person only having an IQ of 100 or so.

 

[Gdjjr]

To wit my emotion: She wrote this for her autistic little brother- one of many things that brings tears to me eyes

 

[Norman]

What is accurate that low status gammas always put ego before facts.

It is completely and utterly ridiculous to think this is correlation without causation. Women VOTE for big government leftists, that's why.

Even if this is true, there would not have been an immediate change in spending due to women voting. It would have taken time. Are you also crediting women for the revenue increase that happened at the same time.

Trouble with graphs? It's 10 years...

Yes, it is 10 years and the uptick started at year 1. Are you too stupid to understand your own graph?

One year after... is not immediately.

It seems you have major trouble with reading the graph. Spare us from your idiocy.

Clearly there is some natural variance to government spending, that's why the past 10 years are also included in the graph.

Gator, you are embarrassing yourself with this idiocy. Please stop it and come back with an actual argument. Ridiculous...

 

[BrokeLoser]

What is accurate that low status gammas always put ego before facts.

It is completely and utterly ridiculous to think this is correlation without causation. Women VOTE for big government leftists, that's why.

Even if this is true, there would not have been an immediate change in spending due to women voting. It would have taken time. Are you also crediting women for the revenue increase that happened at the same time.

Lets cut all the sideways, careful talk bullshit....women voting have fucked this nation up royally...they have pussified American voters, demanded that ***** shit like TOLERANCE be injected within our legislation and judiciary removing the teeth from laws to render them useless. I could go on and on...Generally speaking, women are loving, peace keeping, emotional beings whom lack a killer instinct...they are not capable of shaping or running nations....PERIOD!

 

[Questioner]

What is accurate that low status gammas always put ego before facts.

It is completely and utterly ridiculous to think this is correlation without causation. Women VOTE for big government leftists, that's why.

Even if this is true, there would not have been an immediate change in spending due to women voting. It would have taken time. Are you also crediting women for the revenue increase that happened at the same time.

Lets cut all the sideways, careful talk bullshit....women voting have fucked this nation up royally...they have pussified American voters, demanded that ***** shit like TOLERANCE be injected within our legislation and judiciary removing the teeth from laws to render them useless. I could go on and on...Generally speaking, women are loving, peace keeping, emotional beings whom lack a killer instinct...they are not capable of shaping or running nations....PERIOD!

Quit bitching and whining.

 

[Vastator]

To wit my emotion: She wrote this for her autistic little brother- one of many things that brings tears to me eyes

She has a great voice.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

One year after... is not immediately.

It seems you have major trouble with reading the graph. Spare us from your idiocy.

Clearly there is some natural variance to government spending, that's why the past 10 years are also included in the graph.

So you are too stupid to understand your own graph...

And yes, one year after is immediate because that is how long it would take newly elected officials to set a new budget.

So, are you also giving women the credit for the increased revenue that correlates to the increased spending?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Lets cut all the sideways, careful talk bullshit....women voting have fucked this nation up royally...they have pussified American voters, demanded that ***** shit like TOLERANCE be injected within our legislation and judiciary removing the teeth from laws to render them useless. I could go on and on...Generally speaking, women are loving, peace keeping, emotional beings whom lack a killer instinct...they are not capable of shaping or running nations....PERIOD!

you get a golf clap for that rant...it was spectacular.

 

[BrokeLoser]

What is accurate that low status gammas always put ego before facts.

It is completely and utterly ridiculous to think this is correlation without causation. Women VOTE for big government leftists, that's why.

Even if this is true, there would not have been an immediate change in spending due to women voting. It would have taken time. Are you also crediting women for the revenue increase that happened at the same time.

Lets cut all the sideways, careful talk bullshit....women voting have fucked this nation up royally...they have pussified American voters, demanded that ***** shit like TOLERANCE be injected within our legislation and judiciary removing the teeth from laws to render them useless. I could go on and on...Generally speaking, women are loving, peace keeping, emotional beings whom lack a killer instinct...they are not capable of shaping or running nations....PERIOD!

Quit bitching and whining.

STFU and stop with all the careful speak and spit it the **** out.

 

[Norman]

Most people have been propagandized into being science deniers.

Bigger brains put men ahead of women in the IQ stakes

IQ isn't a part of the "natural sciences", as in Bacon's Inductive Method, so this again just seems to be popular misinformation as to what "science" is to begin with, what it means, where it's relevant, and so on.

"Averages" don't apply to individual 'outliers' so to speak, a woman like Marie Curie obviously had a high level of intelligence, so abusing averages or what they actually "mean" or are used for to begin with for the sake of petty identitarianism is a futile endeavor.

IQ is one of the most reliable predictors in social science. Individuals are not outliers either. It sounds like you have no clue. No one is talking about individuals here, so why do you insist talking about individuals?

I have higher IQ than you, so who cares anyway? You've already lost the genetic lottery. Many of the social sciences and their methodologies are a bit archaic, holdovers from the 19th century, and not entirely applicable in the real world outside of abstraction and speculation. Arguably inferior to emotional intelligence in many regards, as per intelligence experts like Daniel Goleman.

Tell me, what IQ averages actually mean in practice; they're just mathematical abstractions which compare specific individuals side by side within the context of a specific study; they don't apply, in practice to men and women whom the average doesn't fit; such as Marie Curie obviously having a very high IQ; with the "average" person only having an IQ of 100 or so.

IQ being real must have really hurt... yet a other low IQ idiot gets offended.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What is accurate that low status gammas always put ego before facts.

It is completely and utterly ridiculous to think this is correlation without causation. Women VOTE for big government leftists, that's why.

Even if this is true, there would not have been an immediate change in spending due to women voting. It would have taken time. Are you also crediting women for the revenue increase that happened at the same time.

Lets cut all the sideways, careful talk bullshit....women voting have fucked this nation up royally...they have pussified American voters, demanded that ***** shit like TOLERANCE be injected within our legislation and judiciary removing the teeth from laws to render them useless. I could go on and on...Generally speaking, women are loving, peace keeping, emotional beings whom lack a killer instinct...they are not capable of shaping or running nations....PERIOD!

Quit bitching and whining.

He is afraid of women that do not bow down to him. The very idea that someone would treat a woman as an equal, even a spouse, scares the living shit out of him.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Lets cut all the sideways, careful talk bullshit....women voting have fucked this nation up royally...they have pussified American voters, demanded that ***** shit like TOLERANCE be injected within our legislation and judiciary removing the teeth from laws to render them useless. I could go on and on...Generally speaking, women are loving, peace keeping, emotional beings whom lack a killer instinct...they are not capable of shaping or running nations....PERIOD!

you get a golf clap for that rant...it was spectacular.

I'm thoroughly convinced you golf in a skirt and hit from the red tees.

 

[DOTR]

No it isnt. Its an old chat room saying.

No, it is what all students are taught on day one of Stats 101. Because most are as stupid as you can assume one means the other.

Correlation and causation is the only way anything works..the only way humans build patterns.
When you were a child and burnt your hand did your mom say "reach back up there to the stove silly....correlation does not imply causation but you are so cute"?

Correlation can lead to causation, but it is not implied and it is not guaranteed.

Here is an example Correlation does not mean causation

Then on what grounds do you deny causation in this thread Mr Science denier?

 

[DOTR]

Most people have been propagandized into being science deniers.

Bigger brains put men ahead of women in the IQ stakes

IQ isn't a part of the "natural sciences", as in Bacon's Inductive Method, so this again just seems to be popular misinformation as to what "science" is to begin with, what it means, where it's relevant, and so on.

"Averages" don't apply to individual 'outliers' so to speak, a woman like Marie Curie obviously had a high level of intelligence, so abusing averages or what they actually "mean" or are used for to begin with for the sake of petty identitarianism is a futile endeavor.

IQ is one of the most reliable predictors in social science. Individuals are not outliers either. It sounds like you have no clue. No one is talking about individuals here, so why do you insist talking about individuals?

There is one iron clad rule of liberalism..the exception ALWAYS negates the rule. If you say women are shorter than men a liberal will scream "not true I saw a tall woman once".
Their goal is the denial of reality because it is so harsh to them. And pattern recognition is the harshest reality of all.