Quote (Thor123422 @ May 24 2018 07:29am)
The reconstructed data aren't as direct of temperature measurements as modern satellite data. They are based on other factors that typically correlate with CO2 level, or some other factor, that can then be related back to temperature. As such there are greater complicating factors and more artifacts than modern satellite data. A lot of the historical data is also interpreted using the relationships constructed from modern temperature data derived from satellite measurements.
Oh man, you're telling me that historical data isn't as direct a measurement as direct measurements we take today!
Next thing we know, you'll be explaining to me why hotter temperatures mean more drought at the equator.
Quote (thesnipa @ May 24 2018 07:29am)
i don't understand the contention with IQ tests unless you overvalue IQ as some objective measure of intelligence in all facets. IQ tests a specific set of traits that are preferable for many walks of life. EQ has already proven more advantageous in many job setting situations, and the world is increasingly going that way. but i don't understand the contention, unless its from an SJW perspective. Black people weren't given the tool of math and science education, by-and-large, until 100 or so years after many of their white counterparts. of course a test for math and science type thinking will show they lag behind. if someone draws conclusions that blacks are less deserving of jobs that's potentially problematic. are they a math/science field that would validate that? even in math/science fields can EQ make up for a lower IQ? where do blacks score in EQ compared to whites? how much less important is IQ in an era of instant answers via google, a little? a lot?
I don't think blacks should be hired less based on IQ scores generally of blacks. But if a math/science field has a test for employment that essentially mirrors the IQ test because their field is highly applicable is it racism at play if we have less black people hired compared to their population%? I think there's a legitimate argument for the IQ test being outdated for most fields, because internet.
Most IQ tests eschew math/sciences to look for more generalized pattern recognition, observation and learning characteristics. There's no one definition, but its definitely a measure of ration thinking. What's particularly notable is the disparity between early childhood / young adulthood in testing, where children are generally born and raised the same but then diverge closer to maturity. Now you can draw whatever conclusions you want from that, but I don't think it can be said to be exclusive in application to the maths and sciences. The predictive power of IQ in success goes beyond any categorization of discipline.
But the difference between '
excluding people in discriminatory fashion based on ignorant perceptions of race' and '
people being excluded disproportionately in non-discriminatory fashion because of underlying disproportionate demographics'?
That goes right to the heart of the diversity quota debate. The problem is that by a combination of political correctness, science denial and groupthink, some people have deluded themselves into believe their ignorant and discriminatory policies are actually well founded, and look to quack sociology to support it. And its just as wrong when its intersectionality justifying diversity quotas as it was when it was phrenology justifying segregation.
Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.