|
On June 01 2012 19:09 arbitrageur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 19:07 felisconcolori wrote:On June 01 2012 18:24 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 18:21 Crushinator wrote:On June 01 2012 18:17 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 17:25 PiGStarcraft wrote:On June 01 2012 16:10 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 16:06 endy wrote:
In Brachester defense, I live in China, and I personally know both : girls being victims, and guys who just sleep with different girls every week.
I hate unsubstantiated claims, but you can't ask for 5 academic papers every time someone says something. It's not like he said "oh I saw that issue on Vietnamese TV news too!"
. So it's up to 2-10 sample size now? Very good. Try 10,000 and the appropriate robustness tests and then I'll pay attention to your claims. Can't forget a control sample either... This isn't www.elitistpricks.comYou clearly go to university and are very proud of this fact. I guess anyone that doesn't know how to find or reference academic papers doesn't have an opinion worth hearing anymore? And of course everything in this world that exists outside of quantified and categorised data musn't be worth talking about. Ugh, now I feel bad for adopting the same snotty tone you were using. Just trying to say the tone of your messages is very elitist and you can't just demand everyone who wishes to talk about something needs to reference their claims as if it's a university paper. This isn't an academic forum so hoping for that would be a bit silly. Nothing against you personally just I think you're posts were a little off. Good day! He/she made factual claims without providing evidence for them upon request. His beliefs on this matter were formed from a sample size of 1 individual, and perhaps news reports. This is how racist people think. They draw inference from crappy data. I was just pointing out that he was thinking about this badly. I know you are very proud that you just had your first statistics course or something, but you don't actually have to back up every claim you make in a casual discussion. The fact that Vietnam has problems with foreign sex-tourism is pretty common knowledge. Common knowledge does not have to backed up in an academic setting, let alone an internet message board. The common knowledge defence. lmao. Ahh, yes, the common knowledge defence... just like the one you used to support your statement on the IQ of those who have a high pigment content in their skin. Telling someone that something is "commonly known, just google it" is... EXACTLY THE SAME THING YOU'RE MOCKING HIM FOR USING. Troll. Apologies to the rest of the universe, but I cannot possibly read this without responding or having an aneurysm. Or both. How is pointing him in the direction of scientific, published evidence, an appeal to common knowledge? What are you talking about?
You are not pointing him in the direction of scientific, published evidence. You are saying "cbf citing something myself, so you should go search for it because it's commonly known (by me) that it's true." You are making a factual assertion without any reference. When called on it, you are saying "cbf, look it up using this search engine". That is not providing evidence to support your claim - if you believe it is, I invite you to utilize this same statement in an academic setting.
Google Scholar does not provide scientific, published evidence. It provides an index of articles which may be published, may be scientific, but may not in any way be evidence or even factual. There is no guarantee that the results provided will be from ONLY peer reviewed, accepted journals. There is no guarantee that the results will not include incorrect information from outdated, disproven, or questionable sources. Pointing someone to a specific series of results or commonly accepted (academicly) book that is hailed as a standard for the subject at hand might be acceptable. Saying "Google scholar it" is one half step up from "wiki it". It is in fact, a way of saying "my common knowledge is better than your common knowledge - I cannot prove this but I can tell you how to search for what makes it so".
Anyways, that's it. Moving on.
The video itself is propaganda - it's not even new. A bit more open and direct in its xenophobia, but all around gross generalization based on perceptions.
|
On June 01 2012 19:39 Zahir wrote:
Hilarious. A bunch of people defending the scientific method and holding up as their example a study on intelligent quotient, one of the least objective measurements ever, an inherently flawed attempt to quantify the mind and reduce human potential to a number. Might as well link those old 19th scholarly works about the cranial sizes of the various races.
The fact that you link a bunch of numbers with no coherent interpretation or analysis that takes into account the social and historical factors contributing to results shows just how blinded this obsession with data has made you to the actual truth. In the absence of studies, a condition necessarily imposed the complexity and difficulty in studying this particular issue, a truly wise man would settle for what data he could get, in this case, anecdotes. I make no defense of the video, but let's not dismiss every person who comes in here with first or secondhand knowledge, when scholarship is unlikely to provide anything better.
Demanding academic studies when you KNOW that any that exist, if they even do exist, are likely to be heavily flawed is the opposite of smart. It's rigid thinking at best, disingenuous at worst.
What the heck are you talking about? The claim was that white people have a higher IQ than black people. We never stated that we think the things you think that we're thinking. You crayzay.
|
On June 01 2012 19:44 felisconcolori wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 19:09 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 19:07 felisconcolori wrote:On June 01 2012 18:24 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 18:21 Crushinator wrote:On June 01 2012 18:17 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 17:25 PiGStarcraft wrote:On June 01 2012 16:10 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 16:06 endy wrote:
In Brachester defense, I live in China, and I personally know both : girls being victims, and guys who just sleep with different girls every week.
I hate unsubstantiated claims, but you can't ask for 5 academic papers every time someone says something. It's not like he said "oh I saw that issue on Vietnamese TV news too!"
. So it's up to 2-10 sample size now? Very good. Try 10,000 and the appropriate robustness tests and then I'll pay attention to your claims. Can't forget a control sample either... This isn't www.elitistpricks.comYou clearly go to university and are very proud of this fact. I guess anyone that doesn't know how to find or reference academic papers doesn't have an opinion worth hearing anymore? And of course everything in this world that exists outside of quantified and categorised data musn't be worth talking about. Ugh, now I feel bad for adopting the same snotty tone you were using. Just trying to say the tone of your messages is very elitist and you can't just demand everyone who wishes to talk about something needs to reference their claims as if it's a university paper. This isn't an academic forum so hoping for that would be a bit silly. Nothing against you personally just I think you're posts were a little off. Good day! He/she made factual claims without providing evidence for them upon request. His beliefs on this matter were formed from a sample size of 1 individual, and perhaps news reports. This is how racist people think. They draw inference from crappy data. I was just pointing out that he was thinking about this badly. I know you are very proud that you just had your first statistics course or something, but you don't actually have to back up every claim you make in a casual discussion. The fact that Vietnam has problems with foreign sex-tourism is pretty common knowledge. Common knowledge does not have to backed up in an academic setting, let alone an internet message board. The common knowledge defence. lmao. Ahh, yes, the common knowledge defence... just like the one you used to support your statement on the IQ of those who have a high pigment content in their skin. Telling someone that something is "commonly known, just google it" is... EXACTLY THE SAME THING YOU'RE MOCKING HIM FOR USING. Troll. Apologies to the rest of the universe, but I cannot possibly read this without responding or having an aneurysm. Or both. How is pointing him in the direction of scientific, published evidence, an appeal to common knowledge? What are you talking about? You are not pointing him in the direction of scientific, published evidence. You are saying "cbf citing something myself, so you should go search for it because it's commonly known (by me) that it's true." You are making a factual assertion without any reference. When called on it, you are saying "cbf, look it up using this search engine". That is not providing evidence to support your claim - if you believe it is, I invite you to utilize this same statement in an academic setting. Google Scholar does not provide scientific, published evidence. It provides an index of articles which may be published, may be scientific, but may not in any way be evidence or even factual. There is no guarantee that the results provided will be from ONLY peer reviewed, accepted journals. There is no guarantee that the results will not include incorrect information from outdated, disproven, or questionable sources. Pointing someone to a specific series of results or commonly accepted (academicly) book that is hailed as a standard for the subject at hand might be acceptable. Saying "Google scholar it" is one half step up from "wiki it". It is in fact, a way of saying "my common knowledge is better than your common knowledge - I cannot prove this but I can tell you how to search for what makes it so".
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf
|
|
|
On June 01 2012 19:39 Zahir wrote:
Hilarious. A bunch of people defending the scientific method and holding up as their example a study on intelligent quotient, one of the least objective measurements ever, an inherently flawed attempt to quantify the mind and reduce human potential to a number. Might as well link those old 19th scholarly works about the cranial sizes of the various races.
The fact that you link a bunch of numbers with no coherent interpretation or analysis that takes into account the social and historical factors contributing to results shows just how blinded this obsession with data has made you to the actual truth. In the absence of studies, a condition necessarily imposed the complexity and difficulty in studying this particular issue, a truly wise man would settle for what data he could get, in this case, anecdotes. I make no defense of the video, but let's not dismiss every person who comes in here with first or secondhand knowledge, when scholarship is unlikely to provide anything better.
Demanding academic studies when you KNOW that any that exist, if they even do exist, are likely to be heavily flawed is the opposite of smart. It's rigid thinking at best, disingenuous at worst.
QFT
Although since there is a lack of objective data on the topic I would advise people not to jump on the bandwagon just yet. We do have people who may or may not be incorrect in their observation of the world around them (subject to cultural bias etc.) and the "wisest" thing to do in my opinion is to simply accept that there may be a problem but we're not sure.
|
there are retards in every country, just that this time, there's a retard (or rather, a group of retards) running the show at mbc.
|
On June 01 2012 19:42 Xenocide_Knight wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 19:23 arbitrageur wrote:
Also remember that it was "common knowledge" in Germany that Jews were the reason for the depression. More evidence that large amounts of people can be completely idiotic and the reason why your appeals to common knowledge do not provide me with a good reason to believe your claim. Again, common knowledge does not mean it's necessarily correct. Yes, you're right. I think you missed my point. There's a lot more to social interaction than being "right". If a lot of people are being agreeing on something that you think is false, maybe you can help us out and go find evidence of the contrary. Don't care about it enough to do that? Then don't post in this thread. .
Responding to a few questions in this post:
1) I think I'm much smarter than most people when it comes to mathematics, logic, memory and logic puzzles. Tests have demonstrated this repeatedly so I'm confident about this. I don't know about other things (emotional intelligence, broad knowledge about stuff that isn't maths/science etc).
2) I don't care if you acknowledge how smart I am.
3) I can't disprove that White people in foreign countries aren't statistically more likely to prey on Asian girls and victimise them. Well maybe there is some study out there somewhere that does so but I'm not aware of it.
|
On June 01 2012 19:51 arbitrageur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 19:42 Xenocide_Knight wrote:On June 01 2012 19:23 arbitrageur wrote:
Also remember that it was "common knowledge" in Germany that Jews were the reason for the depression. More evidence that large amounts of people can be completely idiotic and the reason why your appeals to common knowledge do not provide me with a good reason to believe your claim. Again, common knowledge does not mean it's necessarily correct. Yes, you're right. I think you missed my point. There's a lot more to social interaction than being "right". If a lot of people are being agreeing on something that you think is false, maybe you can help us out and go find evidence of the contrary. Don't care about it enough to do that? Then don't post in this thread. . Responding to a few questions in this post: 1) I think I'm much smarter than most people when it comes to mathematics, logic, memory and logic puzzles. Tests have demonstrated this repeatedly so I'm confident about this. I don't know about other things (emotional intelligence, broad knowledge about stuff that isn't maths/science etc). 2) I don't care if you acknowledge how smart I am. 3) I can't disprove that White people in foreign countries aren't statistically more likely to prey on Asian girls and victimise them. Well maybe there is some study out there somewhere that does so but I'm not aware of it.
lol give it a rest
Regarding the vid, it's nothing unexpected. I wasnt surprised at all by the generalising commentator or the foreign and korean girls having one-night-stands. I mean, where I live there are about 100 language schools. So the place has quite a few Asian/ Korean students. And it seems the case that Asian/ Korean women usually pair off with somebody non-Asian. That's what I see in the streets anyway.
The comments of "seeing people being intimate made people uncomfortable", made me laugh though. I guess the MBC guys have never been in Europe x]
|
I read this thread before watching the video and I have to say that people are blowing this pretty far out of context. The video makes many appeals to traditional values. Do you think these girls would be dating foreigners if they had any love for traditional values?
|
I have have personal experience about the women who try to get a "safe-card" by dating foreign men. Me and a friend travelled asia for 6 months from Japan thru S Korea, China, thailand, vietnam, cambodja and laos. 3 of the women I dated became extremely desperate about me leaving the country when it was time to move on. They did all kind of crazy stuff to make me stay, just saying.
I think that there are alot of women that try to get away from their life by getting together with forein men, and I completely understand them. Take Cambodja for example, 10 year olds are selling coke on the streets next to hostels ffs.
|
On June 01 2012 19:58 Singularity wrote:
I have have personal experience about the women who try to get a "safe-card" by dating foreign men. Me and a friend travelled asia for 6 months from Japan thru S Korea, China, thailand, vietnam, cambodja and laos. 3 of the women I dated became extremely desperate about me leaving the country when it was time to move on. They did all kind of crazy stuff to make me stay, just saying.
I think that there are alot of women that try to get away from their life by getting together with forein men, and I completely understand them. Take Cambodja for example, 10 year olds are selling coke on the streets next to hostels ffs.
Damn man, Cambodia? Is that place safe?
And yeah I think you're right about the "safe-card".
|
On June 01 2012 19:45 arbitrageur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 19:39 Zahir wrote:
Hilarious. A bunch of people defending the scientific method and holding up as their example a study on intelligent quotient, one of the least objective measurements ever, an inherently flawed attempt to quantify the mind and reduce human potential to a number. Might as well link those old 19th scholarly works about the cranial sizes of the various races.
The fact that you link a bunch of numbers with no coherent interpretation or analysis that takes into account the social and historical factors contributing to results shows just how blinded this obsession with data has made you to the actual truth. In the absence of studies, a condition necessarily imposed the complexity and difficulty in studying this particular issue, a truly wise man would settle for what data he could get, in this case, anecdotes. I make no defense of the video, but let's not dismiss every person who comes in here with first or secondhand knowledge, when scholarship is unlikely to provide anything better.
Demanding academic studies when you KNOW that any that exist, if they even do exist, are likely to be heavily flawed is the opposite of smart. It's rigid thinking at best, disingenuous at worst. What the heck are you talking about? The claim was that white people have a higher IQ than black people. We never stated that we think the things you think that we're thinking. You crayzay.
I didn't say what you thought, i said what you linked. A study centered on a flawed statistic, the relevance of which has never been proven, and provides no meaningful analysis; indeed, no meaning whatsoever. And this is the type of study youd like to see?! Data that doesnt represent what it claims to with no insight or interpretation attached?
|
On June 01 2012 20:02 Zahir wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 19:45 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 19:39 Zahir wrote:
Hilarious. A bunch of people defending the scientific method and holding up as their example a study on intelligent quotient, one of the least objective measurements ever, an inherently flawed attempt to quantify the mind and reduce human potential to a number. Might as well link those old 19th scholarly works about the cranial sizes of the various races.
The fact that you link a bunch of numbers with no coherent interpretation or analysis that takes into account the social and historical factors contributing to results shows just how blinded this obsession with data has made you to the actual truth. In the absence of studies, a condition necessarily imposed the complexity and difficulty in studying this particular issue, a truly wise man would settle for what data he could get, in this case, anecdotes. I make no defense of the video, but let's not dismiss every person who comes in here with first or secondhand knowledge, when scholarship is unlikely to provide anything better.
Demanding academic studies when you KNOW that any that exist, if they even do exist, are likely to be heavily flawed is the opposite of smart. It's rigid thinking at best, disingenuous at worst. What the heck are you talking about? The claim was that white people have a higher IQ than black people. We never stated that we think the things you think that we're thinking. You crayzay. I didn't say what you thought, i said what you linked. A study centered on a flawed statistic, the relevance of which has never been proven, and provides no meaningful analysis; indeed, no meaning whatsoever. And this is the type of study youd like to see?! Data that doesnt represent what it claims to with no insight or interpretation attached?
Oh sorry about misunderstanding you. I just assumed that humans can't read about 20,000 words in 10 minutes.
|
On June 01 2012 20:01 Psychobabas wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 19:58 Singularity wrote:
I have have personal experience about the women who try to get a "safe-card" by dating foreign men. Me and a friend travelled asia for 6 months from Japan thru S Korea, China, thailand, vietnam, cambodja and laos. 3 of the women I dated became extremely desperate about me leaving the country when it was time to move on. They did all kind of crazy stuff to make me stay, just saying.
I think that there are alot of women that try to get away from their life by getting together with forein men, and I completely understand them. Take Cambodja for example, 10 year olds are selling coke on the streets next to hostels ffs. Damn man, Cambodia? Is that place safe? And yeah I think you're right about the "safe-card".
It's as safe as any. As long as you're not actively trying to get yourself killed.
They are just very chill when it comes to drug enforcement.
|
On June 01 2012 15:55 sva wrote:
Being a American male, who is dating a Korean woman I find this silly. I think there are silly things like this all over the world though. It's just another one of those things where instead of being responsible for your actions you claim to be a victim. It's pretty stupid but I don't really have much of a problem with it, we have stupid things like this in America too. Not quite that bad, but similar.
You USA:ans has way more bad and stupid crap then the Koreans.
|
On June 01 2012 20:02 Zahir wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 19:45 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 19:39 Zahir wrote:
Hilarious. A bunch of people defending the scientific method and holding up as their example a study on intelligent quotient, one of the least objective measurements ever, an inherently flawed attempt to quantify the mind and reduce human potential to a number. Might as well link those old 19th scholarly works about the cranial sizes of the various races.
The fact that you link a bunch of numbers with no coherent interpretation or analysis that takes into account the social and historical factors contributing to results shows just how blinded this obsession with data has made you to the actual truth. In the absence of studies, a condition necessarily imposed the complexity and difficulty in studying this particular issue, a truly wise man would settle for what data he could get, in this case, anecdotes. I make no defense of the video, but let's not dismiss every person who comes in here with first or secondhand knowledge, when scholarship is unlikely to provide anything better.
Demanding academic studies when you KNOW that any that exist, if they even do exist, are likely to be heavily flawed is the opposite of smart. It's rigid thinking at best, disingenuous at worst. What the heck are you talking about? The claim was that white people have a higher IQ than black people. We never stated that we think the things you think that we're thinking. You crayzay. flawed statistic... provides no meaningful analysis
You have no idea what you're talking about.
http://edit.onetest.com.au/awms/Upload/documents/whitepapers/Schmidt and Hunter Summary - Onetest.pdf
Yes, I've read the original paper, I can't find the link on the journal search site of my Uni at the moment though.
|
Korean women are acting like total sluts, having unprotected sex with every fucking foreigner, get pregnant and then expect from the male foreigners to take responsibility, like raising the child? I'm not a fan of abortion and etc but the korean women should've known what they're getting into.\
So overall: cool story, South Korea, please continue to ignorantly defend your citizens.
|
Korea (South)17174 Posts
LOL
the man in charge of producing that vid's daughter is obviously dating a white man and he is frustrated with his family blood line being ruined
|
On June 01 2012 19:47 arbitrageur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 19:44 felisconcolori wrote:On June 01 2012 19:09 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 19:07 felisconcolori wrote:On June 01 2012 18:24 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 18:21 Crushinator wrote:On June 01 2012 18:17 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 17:25 PiGStarcraft wrote:On June 01 2012 16:10 arbitrageur wrote:On June 01 2012 16:06 endy wrote:
In Brachester defense, I live in China, and I personally know both : girls being victims, and guys who just sleep with different girls every week.
I hate unsubstantiated claims, but you can't ask for 5 academic papers every time someone says something. It's not like he said "oh I saw that issue on Vietnamese TV news too!"
. So it's up to 2-10 sample size now? Very good. Try 10,000 and the appropriate robustness tests and then I'll pay attention to your claims. Can't forget a control sample either... This isn't www.elitistpricks.comYou clearly go to university and are very proud of this fact. I guess anyone that doesn't know how to find or reference academic papers doesn't have an opinion worth hearing anymore? And of course everything in this world that exists outside of quantified and categorised data musn't be worth talking about. Ugh, now I feel bad for adopting the same snotty tone you were using. Just trying to say the tone of your messages is very elitist and you can't just demand everyone who wishes to talk about something needs to reference their claims as if it's a university paper. This isn't an academic forum so hoping for that would be a bit silly. Nothing against you personally just I think you're posts were a little off. Good day! He/she made factual claims without providing evidence for them upon request. His beliefs on this matter were formed from a sample size of 1 individual, and perhaps news reports. This is how racist people think. They draw inference from crappy data. I was just pointing out that he was thinking about this badly. I know you are very proud that you just had your first statistics course or something, but you don't actually have to back up every claim you make in a casual discussion. The fact that Vietnam has problems with foreign sex-tourism is pretty common knowledge. Common knowledge does not have to backed up in an academic setting, let alone an internet message board. The common knowledge defence. lmao. Ahh, yes, the common knowledge defence... just like the one you used to support your statement on the IQ of those who have a high pigment content in their skin. Telling someone that something is "commonly known, just google it" is... EXACTLY THE SAME THING YOU'RE MOCKING HIM FOR USING. Troll. Apologies to the rest of the universe, but I cannot possibly read this without responding or having an aneurysm. Or both. How is pointing him in the direction of scientific, published evidence, an appeal to common knowledge? What are you talking about? You are not pointing him in the direction of scientific, published evidence. You are saying "cbf citing something myself, so you should go search for it because it's commonly known (by me) that it's true." You are making a factual assertion without any reference. When called on it, you are saying "cbf, look it up using this search engine". That is not providing evidence to support your claim - if you believe it is, I invite you to utilize this same statement in an academic setting. Google Scholar does not provide scientific, published evidence. It provides an index of articles which may be published, may be scientific, but may not in any way be evidence or even factual. There is no guarantee that the results provided will be from ONLY peer reviewed, accepted journals. There is no guarantee that the results will not include incorrect information from outdated, disproven, or questionable sources. Pointing someone to a specific series of results or commonly accepted (academicly) book that is hailed as a standard for the subject at hand might be acceptable. Saying "Google scholar it" is one half step up from "wiki it". It is in fact, a way of saying "my common knowledge is better than your common knowledge - I cannot prove this but I can tell you how to search for what makes it so". http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf
Ah yes. You are citing the work of a professor most well known for the criticisms of his work. This is not scientific proof. This is a survey of previous research, inheriting all of the flaws present in those other works and only choosing those studies which allow Rushton to agree with his long held belief in the inherent superiority of one group of people chosen on the basis of skin pigmentation. (I will leave off mentioning that this is a psychologist attempting to prove genetics without any of the requisite skills, ability, or any reference to actual biological science.)
In short - no, that work is contradicted by many others and the debate is still ongoing. (Ref - http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/Suzuki-Aronson.pdf ) Psychological research is questionable in this regard (conflicting results and debate about what results mean) and any attempt to generalize a result to a wider population than your sample will be difficult.
|
On June 01 2012 20:13 synd wrote:
Korean women are acting like total sluts, having unprotected sex with every fucking foreigner, get pregnant and then expect from the male foreigners to take responsibility, like raising the child? I'm not a fan of abortion and etc but the korean women should've known what they're getting into.\
So overall: cool story, South Korea, please continue to ignorantly defend your citizens.
True, it takes 2 to tango right?
Maybe the Koreans need to think about why their women are doing this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
