Official Protest Thread

[JWeinCom]

dark_gh0st_b0y said:

JWeinCom said:

I believe the unknowns are cases still in trial or unresolved? not sure if/when the data is updated but we are talking about the FBI here, what would be the point of releasing statistics if the method of recording them is highly skewed by things like rural/urban areas as you suggest...

I have no idea.  That's why I'm not making any conclusions.  As for why the FBI releases data as they do, you'd have to ask them for methodology.  Many agencies simply report the data that they have access to.  The FBI is not conducting a scientific study, they're not trying to create a random sample.

Again, there are only categories for black and white, so the rest of the population is most likely represented in that data to some extent. I don't think this data point has any relevance in this conversation, and don't care enough to look it up.  If you think it is, then you should probably do a little of that thing called research to find out how the statistics came about.  

I am sorry that the 49% figure is inaccurate or outdated yes, but it would not lead me/anyone to wrong conclusions anyway, you are only making it a big matter because you disagree with me in general, if I was someone who agrees with you, you wouldn't bother to ask for sources at all...

Far as I can tell, it's not just inaccurate or outdated... it's literally made up.  You still haven't said where that figure came from. 

Please back up that claim if you're going to make accusations... I do not yet have an opinion on this matter, so I don't exactly agree with anyone.  I definitely disagree with some people though... People who are posting misinformation.

Let's not forget that you started this by asking people what they thought about the statistics you posted. I told you that your statistics are wrong, and actually provided a source.  How dare I :-/ 

find reasons to declare the statistics as inaccurate does not make them ineligible, my point is not whether they commit 4x or 6x more crimes, the point is that they commit significantly more such to take it into account

Wait what?  The statistics being inaccurate does not make them ineligible?  Yes... yes it absolutely does. O_o... Don't even know what to say to the assertion that invalid statistics are usable.  And this is the disingenuousness that's running through this whole thing. 

"I based my opinion on these statistics."

"But those statistics are wrong..."

"Oh well, sure the statistic may be wrong, but my point is still right."

If this is the case, then the opinion came first and was in no way guided by the statistics. Does that make your point wrong? Not necessarily. But it makes it obvious that the conclusion came first.  

And 4 times vs 6 times is absolutely a huge difference... If you're arguing that there's a correlation between police brutality and crime rate, then 4 times versus 6 times is incredibly statistically significant.  Before you send me that statistics book you suggested, you should probably skim it first.

And of course you're still making up random stats you can't support. As of 2017, black people made up 27% of arrests. Less than half as much as white people. Definitely not significantly more.  

They are still overrepresented in terms of arrests, which again is different than committing crimes.  They are still overrepresented, but only by about 2x.  A much smaller amount, which can way more likely be based to a large extent on enforcement strategies or non-racial factors such as poverty levels and such. 

These are facts which are easily accessible to you (FBI statistics). You should look them up before making claims. Don't you think you should look up those statistics before making claims?

I am asking by suggesting my dear, as I said above, shaping up my opinion, not being absolute, not stating it

When claim your explanation makes sense, you're stating it's a valid conclusion, or at least that you believe it's a valid conclusion.  Especially when you say it "must be the case". You are claiming the proposition that "it must be the case that crime rates are the cause of racism" makes sense. That's a conclusion.

"Just asking questions" is a common example of bad faith argument, and a very common trolling tactic. It's a way to make put forward a position while maintaining plausible deniability. It makes sense that since you're using common troll tactics, you must be a troll.  Don't you think you're a troll?

Now, if you call me out for accusing you of trolling and I say "oh no no, I was just asking a question to shape my opinion good sir" would you buy that? (For the record I'm not accusing anyone of anything, just giving an example.)

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions

https://katenasser.com/people-skills-professional-replace-the-deadly-dont-you-think-leadership/

https://www.phrasemix.com/phrases/dont-you-think

Stop being disingenuous. 

by that thinking of yours no one should have an opinion about matters, where shall I base my opinion on if not statistics, mass trends and asking other people for more opinions/articles/numbers? you are acting as if I'm about to publish my opinion on the news :P

No.  By that thinking people should only express an opinion after they have done sufficient research on the topic.  Not after looking for data on wikipedia, asking people who are not experts, and looking at statistics while admittedly not caring where there source is from or if the statistics are actually accurate. Of course, the level of research one should do is also in proportion to the importance of the topic.

Honestly, how much time have you spent researching this issue?  Do you think that amount of research is enough to form an accurate conclusion?

agh, you are over-complicating things for no reason... there are always inaccuracies in statistics, no stat is 100% perfect that's unreal and academically speaking it doesn't have to, inaccuracy doesn't mark something as misinformation, that's why we have confidence intervals and margins of error, to inform the reader that the real number might typically vary +_ 5% most of the times

did black people commit significantly more crimes in 2015 or not my dear? 49% or 53% will not change any reasonable person's opinion, now if you want to declare this as misinformation then do so...

I am honest and I admit when I'm wrong and I said sorry at least 2 times, even if it's a much smaller issue than you present it to be, it was probably from wikipedia as were the graphs, possibly removed or updated along with more recent stats due to the recent events, I have no reason to make up figures as you accuse me of doing, you are obviously biased against me and want to find little details to devalue my opinion even thought I stated that I have not shaped one yet

and how do you know what research I do for that? the first post was more than a week ago, maybe if you didn't stick to a 4% accuracy error that changes nothing, we could discuss more meaningful things, like how the figures have changed the recent years and what is actually causing black people to commit more crimes, such as social segregation, social and economic class, less access to high level education, more exposed to gang crime etc... and how racism and slavery from centuries ago has led us to this...

First off, don't call me my dear.

More importantly, O_O... You are still posting misinformation.  Despite the fact that I literally posted the information for you one post ago.

You are still making up figures.  As I've explained several times now, neither the 49% nor the 53% figure are accurate.  It's not a 4% error, because the 53% figure is no more accurate than the 49% figure. Not only do you post figures without checking to see if they're accurate, but somehow even after being shown that they're inaccurate you're still doing it.

But the issue is not about how accurate the information is, but about the fact that you don't care enough to actually check the figure and make sure it's accurate.  When you posted 49% you had no idea what the actual figure is (which btw is still not 53%).  If I said your penis is 2 inches long then that's a problem.  Even if your penis is actually very small, I have no way of knowing that, so it's irresponsible and dishonest of me to say so.

Please answer this.  Do you understand that the problem is not how accurate the information is, but the fact that you posted it without any rational basis for knowing how accurate it was? (This btw is an example of me conveying my opinion through a question.  It's quite possible.)

Black people did as a matter of fact did not commit significantly more crimes in 2015. Based on the available data, it seems they committed significantly fewer crimes than white people did. I literally explained this one post ago.  They did not commit 49% or 53% of the crime. They made up 27% of arrests in 2015. Even if we assume that the arrest rate matches the rate of crimes being committed, you're not off by 4%, you're off by 22%. Nearly a factor of 2. Like, I gave you the actual information one post ago and somehow you're still posting misinformation.

Again, please stop pretending that saying "It makes sense that x must be the case" is not stating an opinion.  If you do, it makes sense that you must be lying.  (Which obviously isn't me saying you're lying... I'm just shaping my opinion here). It's weird that things keep getting explained to you, you don't suggest any flaw in the explanation, and just go on as if it hadn't been explained to you.

This is like someone getting caught in the middle of a murder, and when they get arrested telling the cop "oh you only arrested me cause you're biased".  You're posting misinformation and you're getting called on it. If that bothers you, then stop posting misinformation.

I don't know what research you did.  That's why I asked. Based on the quality of your posts though, I'm guessing not a whole lot. Feel free to prove me wrong.  How much research have you done?  What sources have you been using?

And no, we can't discuss other things.  Because your opinions are only as good as your data.  If you don't understand why posting stats without knowing what the source is, whether the data is accurate, and apparently not even knowing where you even found the statistic, is a problem, then you don't have proper standards of evidence.  Your epistemology is basically "Well I found this on the internet and that's good enough for me". If someone doesn't understand how to come to sound conclusions, anything they say is worthless.

Last edited by JWeinCom - on 15 June 2020