This new Childish Gambino Song Promotes Divisive Lies

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Edumakated

I am dead serious. There is no sociologist or social scientists who looks at stats and finds causation.

It's rediculous.

If you can't comprehend that statistics are skewed by a specific cause I can't help you figure it out.

Black people don't kill more black people as a race. Black people kill more black people in ultra consolidated areas due to environmental factors. This skews the data apparently you haven't studied statistics or the scientific method and anomaly..

Answer me this are rural black people more violent than rural whites?

Actually, blacks in rural areas are also just as violent. In fact, small cities in largely rural areas have higher per capita murder rates than large cities. Cities like Baton Rouge, Birmingham, Jackson (Mississippi), Savannah, etc are far more violent than even the poster child Chicago on a per capita basis.

The issue isn't even rural vs city. There is a violent culture that has rooted itself within low income black communities. the culture is defined by single parents, low education, poverty, gangs, etc. Where ever you find those variables and a high concentration of blacks, you will have disproportionate amounts of violence. Even in rural areas, you will still have housing projects, low income housing, etc that all share the same characteristics of their urban counterparts.

I am impressed with your denial of reality. Your quip about social scientists shows why they aren't really taken serious as academics.

a reply to: Edumakated

Lol,

So you don't understand statistics or anthropology . Got it.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Edumakated

Lol,

So you don't understand statistics or anthropology . Got it.

I understand stats just fine. You are the one who hasn't presented anything other than your opinion to refute any data. By all means, please put up FBI crime stats or any other stats to actually back up your position.

a reply to: Edumakated
You don't understand the study of statistics. Which is not looking at numbers and drawing a conclusion.

Or perhaps whites are very violent. Alaska being the worst per capita state..followed by new Mexico and Nevada. Not real black states.

Since this isn't the actual scientific way to study things a normal person knows statistics don't prove causation.

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied

Where are the black professing that white people are their biggest problems? Oh, there are some out there no doubt, but for everyone you find I can find a white person professing that blacks or other minorities are ruining 'their great country'.

Come on man it's actually being taught in the universities and schools. There is nobody at any university or school teaching that black people are the problem. Ever hear of Evergreen State College? How about "End Whiteness Month" that occurs at colleges around the country every year now?

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Edumakated
You don't understand the study of statistics. Which is not looking at numbers and drawing a conclusion.

Or perhaps whites are very violent. Alaska being the worst per capita state..followed by new Mexico and Nevada. Not real black states.

Since this isn't the actual scientific way to study things a normal person knows statistics don't prove causation.

Stats prove who is committing more crime. You may not like the answer the numbers give, but they are legitimate and they prove there is no white threat against black Americans. You just seem angry that you can't produce stats to back your position.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Edumakated
You don't understand the study of statistics. Which is not looking at numbers and drawing a conclusion.

Or perhaps whites are very violent. Alaska being the worst per capita state..followed by new Mexico and Nevada. Not real black states.

Since this isn't the actual scientific way to study things a normal person knows statistics don't prove causation.

You can draw many conclusions and observations from statistics. I never claimed correlation equals causation... however, I am also not going to do as you have and deny reality that there is an epidemic of gun violence within the black community.

Being a black male and having spent more than my fair share of time living in the hood, I think I have an informed grasp of the situation.

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Edumakated
You don't understand the study of statistics. Which is not looking at numbers and drawing a conclusion.

Or perhaps whites are very violent. Alaska being the worst per capita state..followed by new Mexico and Nevada. Not real black states.

Since this isn't the actual scientific way to study things a normal person knows statistics don't prove causation.

Stats prove who is committing more crime. You may not like the answer the numbers give, but they are legitimate and they prove there is no white threat against black Americans. You just seem angry that you can't produce stats to back your position.

Facts are racist...

If you can't prove the facts are racists, then you have to pull other variables out of your azz to make them racists...

If you can't do that, then you have to claim the source of the data is racist.

If you can't do that, you just claim the other person doesn't know what they are talking about...

If that fails, just blame Trump.

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Edumakated
You don't understand the study of statistics. Which is not looking at numbers and drawing a conclusion.

Or perhaps whites are very violent. Alaska being the worst per capita state..followed by new Mexico and Nevada. Not real black states.

Since this isn't the actual scientific way to study things a normal person knows statistics don't prove causation.

Stats prove who is committing more crime. You may not like the answer the numbers give, but they are legitimate and they prove there is no white threat against black Americans. You just seem angry that you can't produce stats to back your position.

I think the stats show that white people commit more crime.

a reply to: Thejoncrichton

You mean Blax history month. don't cha, well ever asked yourself how and when that came about??...naaw you probably don't and worst...won't !! you probably whine about HBCU or historically black colleges and universities, emphasis on "Historically". also and mags like Ebony Jet, Black Enterprise and omg BET.
But never mind pls continue in self imposed ignorance..

originally posted by: introvert


I think the stats show that white people commit more crime.

Ok, this has been explained over and over again. What is the percentage of white people in this country? They are ~65%. What is the percentage of black people? It's ~13% (6% black male which is who is mostly committing the crimes). Based on just raw numbers it would be pretty hard for black men to do as much crime as ~65% of the country. HOWEVER, if you break down those numbers per capita, the rate of crime from 6% of the country reaches over 50%. I provided a fact check with this information in the OP.....

www.channel4.com...

And yes, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, black offenders committed 52 per cent of homicides recorded in the data between 1980 and 2008. Only 45 per cent of the offenders were white. Homicide is a broader category than “murder” but let’s not split hairs.

BTW, this is from a liberal outlet.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Edumakated
You don't understand the study of statistics. Which is not looking at numbers and drawing a conclusion.

Or perhaps whites are very violent. Alaska being the worst per capita state..followed by new Mexico and Nevada. Not real black states.

Since this isn't the actual scientific way to study things a normal person knows statistics don't prove causation.

Stats prove who is committing more crime. You may not like the answer the numbers give, but they are legitimate and they prove there is no white threat against black Americans. You just seem angry that you can't produce stats to back your position.

I think the stats show that white people commit more crime.

Only if you don't understand statistics...

a reply to: Thejoncrichton

Ok, this has been explained over and over again. What is the percentage of white people in this country? They are ~65%. What is the percentage of black people? It's ~13% (6% black male which is who is mostly committing the crimes). Based on just raw numbers it would be pretty hard for black men to do as much crime as ~65% of the country. HOWEVER, if you break down those numbers per capita, the rate of crime from 6% of the country reaches over 50%. I provided a fact check with this information in the OP.....

That is a different argument. You did not say "stats are proving who commit more crime per capita". You said: "Stats prove who is committing more crime".

That is true. Stats show white people commit more crime.

BTW, this is from a liberal outlet.

Ok. Why do I care?

originally posted by: Mintbisti
You are not wrong --> www.newnation.org...

If I am not mistaken, new nation is a propaganda source used by white nationalists, supremacists and separatists.

originally posted by: introvert


That is true. Stats show white people commit more crime.

No, that's not what it shows. Geez man....Especially considering Hispanics get counted as white.

originally posted by: bender151
a reply to: Thejoncrichton


3) if fact, the one complaint he makes towards the establishment is that, as a black man, he's just a bar code... or statistic. Which you're all too willing to reinforce.

The point is we are all just a BAR CODE to the establishment!! they do not look at us any different.. were all pawns and cogs in the damn system they do not care about single white males anymore were black now too... you guys got what you wanted if you think i have any white privilege come down to the park and i'll show you real life with all walks of colors you moron!

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton

originally posted by: introvert


That is true. Stats show white people commit more crime.

No, that's not what it shows. Geez man....Especially considering Hispanics get counted as white.

ucr.fbi.gov...

Minus the hispanic/latino statistics, whites are still the "majority".

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton

originally posted by: introvert


That is true. Stats show white people commit more crime.

No, that's not what it shows. Geez man....Especially considering Hispanics get counted as white.

Middle easterners are considered white as well. So a dark Egyption is white, while a blonde haired/blue eyed Argentinian is considered Latino.

a reply to: Edumakated

the out of wedlock birth rate in the black community wasn't even 25% in 1965 and even then it was considered too high versus the 75% it is now.

The out of wedlock birth rate in the black community was indeed about 24% in 1965. At the same time, the out of wedlock birth rate among whites was 3.1%.

It's now over 30% for whites and about 75% for blacks (and 50-someting % for hispanics). And of course, the numbers are skewed so that the younger the mother's age, the higher the percentage of out of wedlock births.

I think you're trying to find causation out of a correlation that isn't that great to begin with. You blame the "War on Poverty" for the rise in out of wedlock births in the black community but clearly that couldn't explain why they were 8x higher in 1965 than for whites.

So clearly some other factor(s) was/were at play to begin with. You also don't address that since then, while there's been a 3 fold increase in out of wedlock births among the black population, there's been a 10 fold increase among whites. And what about other racial/ethnic groups such as Native Americans where it's almost as high as for black folks?

So that's one problem with your argument. The second is aside from being a traditional "ideal" what is the actual usefulness of citing out of wedlock births when arguing for the health of a demographic?

The OP talks about black on black crimes so let's talk about crime. Given this "out of wedlock" hypothesis, one might predict that an increase in out of wedlock births would strongly correlate with increases in violent crime. However, the reality is that at the same time that the rates of out of wedlock births have drastically increased, violent crime rates have steadily fallen. The reality is the opposite of what would be expected if the out of wedlock hypothesis were true. If this was 1993, the out of wedlock hypothesis might *seem* to make more sense if you accounted for a lag between births and the ages when people are most likely to violent crimes but what's actually happened is that violent crime continued to decline even as out of wedlock births steadily increased.

More plausible factors would be things like deindustrialization or the increased market for coc aine and later crack (which I've seen a lot of sociologists attribute the homicide peak in the early 90s to).

It's not entirely unreasonable to look for correlations but as everyone knows, correlation is not causation. The same applies to the meme of Democratic mayors or black leaders. A bad leader with bad policies is less likely to preside over an improvement but at the same time, there are significant factors beyond their control and a bad leader can be in office when things are good and a good leader can be at the helm of a sinking ship that cannot be saved.

You think Clinton was just some sort of economic mastermind or that he and Gingrich were just so awesome that they pulled all the right levers at all the right times? Pfft. Clinton was in office between recessions and during the tech boom and left office as the bubble was bursting. Then you've got to look at the role of something like the price of oil in recessions.

I guess the point here is that trying to look for causation in singular factors in a massively complex system, identified through limited correlation, is a foolish pursuit. It happens all the time in politics unfortunately.