| Kasz216 said: Except. It isn't. Once data has been provided, it's up to the critics to prove valid criticism. Which you have not done. You are just spitballing random ignorant sugestions at this point... about something you know zero about. You may as well be argueing evolution was faked because some ancient civilization buried dinosaur bones all over the place. You cant' deny that COULD happen.... now can you? You can't deny that it's a possibility. It's a very unlikely, stupid possibility... but it sure is possible.
I'm guessing you also believe global warming is fake. After all, climate scientists don't have answers for EVERYTHING in the climate system, so it's totally possible there are other natural gases causing it, since they can't measure everything it's far too vast and complicated a system... there are plenty of possibilties that are unaccounted for so far afterall. And i mean... apparently that's all you have to say, with zero data... and that's it. |
So you're denying that there's no such thing as saturation? That there's no ceiling for the test, because what I have shown is HOW saturation can play a part in skewing the results, which you're ignoring. I'm starting to wonder if you have ANY clue about mathematics if you're willing to ignorantly deny one of the somplest factors on gathering averages that contain a ceiling.
What you're doing is using this graph as a basis of student performance, when in fact it's limited to the scope of the exam. You're not going to go ahead and deny that too, are you? You did admit, after all, that the results obtained were from the NAEP exams, which are apparently so good that they're able to justify every cent being spent on a student.
The difference between evolutionclimate change and this is, there has been substantial evidence BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that it they both existm whereas your argument is "Education spending is out of control with zero result ON THIS ONE EXAM TYPE that has a ceiling and NO ACTUAL DATA ON THE SCOPE OF SAID EXAM" for all you've provided, it could be something as easy as an entrance exam. Your argument is RIDDLED with holes, so don't you dare place it anywhere near the same places as evolution/climate change.
