FAQ |
Members List |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics. |
Register to reply Log in to reply |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#26 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Did Professor Rund Koopmans also do a study on Hindu, ultra orthodox Jews and ultra orthodox Christians?
__________________
No longer on this site. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#27 | |||
|
||||
Hands off my Brick!
|
They are comparable in the sense, it's cutting off a part of a childs genitals without consent and for no good reason (unless it's medically required) I am well aware that it's much worse for a female, I've already said that
__________________
![]() Spoiler: |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#28 | ||
|
|||
-
|
Livia confuses the terms "comparable" and "equatable" despite my best efforts. I think it's just defiance at this point.
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#29 | |||
|
||||
This Witch doesn't burn
|
Quote:
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#30 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
Quote:
You have your own agenda and will only hear what you want to hear. I doubt too many are influenced by that. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#31 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
So how did you find his article, why did you skirt around that very direct question?
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#32 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#33 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Believe you or not? You havent answered how you came across the article yet lol! You havent put me in a posistion to not believe you. (The rest of your post isnt really relevant to the only discussion I'm having with you on the subject).
__________________
![]() Last edited by Withano; 14-03-2017 at 08:11 PM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#35 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#36 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
So you cant answer how you came across the article...
... so when I suggested that you probably searched in to google for an article precisely or similiar to the one you found, I can assume I was correct?
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#37 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
You and your conspiracy theories - Islamic migration in the West - see for yourself. Read it and weep.
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#38 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
How did you come across the article.
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#39 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
Another interesting one - Muslim dynamics in Europe by The Middle East Quarterly.
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#41 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
I just told you - I typed in Islamic immigration in the West. What is so controversial about that?
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#43 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#44 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Although your article was technically accurate in reporting the findings, they failed to mention what the finding actually show (an inconclusive dataset with inconsistent questions and too few participants). conclusions can not be drawn with this data set.
__________________
![]() Last edited by Withano; 14-03-2017 at 09:01 PM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#45 | ||
|
|||
Banned
|
It's just hysteria really.
Most of the 'facts' presented in the article are unqualified and thus untrustworthy and the study it quotes figures is dubious at best. http://www.thenational.ae/world/euro...ism-criticised The title of the article is enough to call bull**** on it alone. Last edited by Tom4784; 14-03-2017 at 09:22 PM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#46 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
Quote:
Last edited by Brillopad; 15-03-2017 at 06:56 AM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#47 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
You cant have a differering interpretation, opinion or motivation on a cronbach alpha score. It just is what it is. Undeniably internally unreliable. The original author does not suggest otherwise, he'd be ridiculed even more so if he did. The article you found on the study, whether you like this or not, was biased. There are tens of things wrong with the best of published studies, and your author declared zero for this obscure one. This study has a hell of a lot more than ten things wrong with it lol. The questions, for one, must be deemed unreliable for every single person who wishes to interpret them based on the alpha score, including the guy who wrote the original publication. All interpretations afterwards are based on unreliable questions and should not be taken entirely seriously... even if you read some article about it made by some bloke with a biased agenda, and a clickbait title
__________________
![]() Last edited by Withano; 15-03-2017 at 07:54 AM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#48 | ||
|
|||
Banned
|
Quote:
The results are skewed and you can't deny that although you will because of confirmation bias. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#49 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
Quote:
My point being there is always someone who will have a different view who will point out any perceived inconsistencies/bias/procedural inaccuracies etc. A study can be challenged years down the line when new info or ideas come to light - little is written in stone on things like this. It isn't like diagnosing a medical condition or stating that the world is round. There are other studies that have expressed similar concerns - it isn't just one study. To attempt to dismiss all concerns as either racism or stupidity is just words with an agenda and worse than the worst study and achieves nothing but adding fuel to the fire. This is a Hugh unknown area and complacency is foolhardy. At the end of the day there is no proven right or wrong - only viewpoint. Last edited by Brillopad; 15-03-2017 at 11:31 AM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#50 | ||
|
|||
Banned
|
Quote:
If you think poking valid holes in a flawed study is confirmation bias then you don't understand what confirmation bias is, you can't just explain away what is an incredibly flawed study by saying that the flaws are basically a matter of opinion when they aren't. You can't also say 'there are other studies that expressed similar concerns' without actually linking them, the only study that's been presented in this topic is the one in the article and it's already been proven as flawed and unreliable. The article is biased, inflammatory and the only figures it backs up are from a study that's easily discredited. It's a worthless clickbait article with no real merit. |
||
![]() |
Register to reply Log in to reply |
|
|