What, raking again?

Among the muck that includes the-teacher's-an-upgrade and a 's branch favoring its own one-party line come articles like this. I very much appreciate this writer's explanation of context in research, so here's some of the bolded text that stuck with me:

"...numbers without contexts can also lead to cheating by being misleading rather than outright lying.

Sometimes, contexts will always be incomplete even when you've all the relevant numbers because some contexts contain some important details that are very hard to be quantified, so when it comes to relevant knowledge, knowing those details are crucial as well."

Having read that article, I follow up with this one.

I had a closer look at the research it cites, and while I won't argue with much of the scholarly work, I do take issue with how the article that uses these papers chooses one race and ignores another. (There's an article that would have fit in this collection, one containing a graph on different academic fields, but I haven't found it yet.) This paper posted in 2020 was from work done in 2017, using information from a 2015 survey.

"Findings: We find that many of the drivers of support for gun control found in the general population apply to minorities as well, but the substantive effects vary across groups. Similar to prior general population findings, we find that for all groups concern about crime is associated with more support for gun control, and that gun ownership, being the victim of a crime and conservative political values are associated with less support. In contrast, we find that racial prejudice is negatively correlated with support for gun control among whites and Latinos, while one type of racial prejudice — racial resentment — increases support for gun control among Blacks."

The notes on the second research paper are worth a read as well, once again for context details in their source materials and the subjects that were chosen.

"No speculation, just facts," says the head of the deep space sci-fi show from earlier today. I do wonder, though, what the opinions would be of the instructors at the ranges I went to.

This article is cherry-picking, and its writer is plaid.

- Not quite 'more things in heaven and earth, Horatio.' Wait, hang on - I should be sensitive to those unwilling to fight for that Bill.

- Buying? Nah. Still funny, though.

- Ending with this because much as I prefer tea, this story is fascinating.

Featured Posts
Recent Posts