No, you don't. As evidenced by your next paragraph:
Your wrong statistics don't make my paragraph wrong.
This is absolutely ridiculous. Let's say you have a chance to win $1,000,000, and it rides on one free throw. You get to choose the shooter, either Shaq or Kobe. Who are you going to choose? Well, in your logic it wouldn't matter, there's a 50/50 chance either way. But anyone will tell you to choose Kobe. There's a much higher probability that he'll make the shot.
You're mixing apples and oranges. You're making a determination about Shaq or Kobe based upon what EACH has already done. Whereas you're telling the Black men that they are 5x more apt to commit murder and 3Xs more likely to commit rape based upon what OTHER black men have done. It simply isn't the same.
Again, you're ignoring what I am saying. I am not saying that I can walk up to a black man and tell him that he has a 500% more likelihood of killing someone. What I am saying is that if you chose a random white guy, and a random black guy, the black guy is 5x as likely to be a killer than the white guy is, and 3x more likely to be a rapist.
That's a crazy, racially prejudiced lie. That's just like me saying that because 9Xs more white parents were racists in the 60s than were black parents racists during the 60s that I could walk up to their white kids and say there's 9xs more of a probability that because your parents were racists you too will be a racist.
That's beyond crazy. You can't determine whether somebody will be a rapist or a murderer based off their skin color.
If that were the case, then Blacks should assume that every person with white skin is a racist.
I have already explained this. The black culture is to blame, not the color of their skin. There's no way to simplify it any more.
You're trying to separate the two. Do you separate your skin color from your white culture? People of all cultures tend to share the same basic wants and desires. They just have different ways of going about it
I'll be honest. You're making it real hard to remain civil with your continued ignoring of the obvious. If a school has 100 students, 25 black and 75 white, and all of them cheat once, then obviously more white people cheated than black people.
I didn't ask you to remain civil. You be as mean and nasty as you want. You're still WRONG.
And just because three times more white students cheated than black students cheated does NOT mean that if you bring another white student into the school that he's three times more likely to cheat than would a black student.
You can't make a deduction about what someone else will do based upon stats that don't include them.
You'd think I was a straight nutt if I walked into your church as a pastor and started to tell you all that based on past statistics, every white guy in here is 70Xs more likely to be a racist just because he's white.
That's foolishness.
But the ratio of the percentage is the same 1:1. If all the black people cheat, and only 67% of the white people cheat, then that means that 50 white people cheated - double the amount of black people. But there's still more of a prevalence among black people in this scenario.
It is about the raw numbers. You bringing another black student into that situation doesn't mean that because ALL the black students cheated that the probability of the new student cheating too will be 100%.
His probability of being a cheater is 50/50. It has NOTHING to do with what the other students decided to do.
It's not about the raw numbers. I can't state that emphatically enough. Raw numbers mean absolutely nothing. Zilch. Nada. Zero. Worthless. Numbers mean nothing without a reference point.
They don't mean anything the way you're trying to not use them.
You're trying to be like I was in 2nd grade, when I used to brag about getting 3rd place in a wrestling tournament. I conveniently left out that there were only three competitors. That's what you are doing by trying to use raw numbers without a reference point.
I'm not trying to use raw numbers as a reference point. I'm flat out telling you that you can't make a probability assumption about what someone else will be or likely do in the future based upon past data that did not include them. That's just ludicrous.
That's just like saying you've got 10 little sapper woody kids. The first nine get through high school but are dumb as little red bricks and have to take all remedial classes.
Number 10 shows up and is an absolute genius. But the guidance counselor says, we've had 9 of you little sapper woodys here already. So I don't care what you say to me or what you show me, we're placing you in remedial classes since 100% of the sapper woodys before you had to take remedial classes.
Let me make this real simple. 13% of the population is black. If things were even, then they'd commit 13% of all crimes. But that's not the case. Per Capita, black people commit more crimes. More than double in almost every category, all the way up to 500% more in the murder category.
Yes let's make this real simple. Blacks between the ages of 18 and 30 could have in 2013 committed 100% of the crimes in the United States. It STILL wouldn't mean that you would be correct to go up to a generic black man turning 18 and say there's a 100% chance that you'll commit a crime.
Because statistically that simply isn't true. That may have been true of a measure for 2013. But that has no standing in what someone who wasn't part of that measure will do. Whether he will or not STILL remains 50/50.
I've already addressed this. You're just degenerating it into a "Yes huh" "Nu huh" debate. Because what you are saying it does not do is exactly what it does.
It's not degenerating into anything other than you think you know what you're talking about when what you're saying shows that you do not.
I used statistics and probability in military intelligence in Iraq. We used statistics to determine the likelihood of an IED being placed in a certain area at a certain time. It's called pattern analysis. We were able to have a high find to detonation ratio (in the 70% range) due to our looking at past statistics and using them to determine the probability of the future. In short, that's exactly what statistics are used for. It's used in military intelligence, in scouting for sports teams, in investing. You even use it when you decide what route to take while driving, trying to avoid traffic jams or rush hour.
I have doctorates in Chemistry and Advanced Mathematics. Go JACKETS!!! You used statistics to determine a pattern for PEOPLE placing an inanimate object in a certain place. You didn't use pattern analysis to determine what people were going to place them there. You didn't walk up to your average Iraqi and say because of pattern analysis, we've determined that you're 5Xs more likely to place an IED than Uday down the street.
So, if you really believed what you are saying, then there's no point in investing money. You have a 50/50 chance of making a profit or loss.
That's correct. Breaking even isn't an option. :laugh:
There's no point in avoiding a crowded street during rush hour. There's a 50/50 chance it'll be busy.
That's correct. Either it's busy or it's not.
And most importantly, there's no reason I am not playing in the NBA right now.
Either you had NBA talent or you did not.
There's a problem anytime anyone commits a crime. But when one group is committing 5x more than another, then that group has some variable that either is not present or not as significant in the other group.
And what was that variable when all those white folks were lynching black folks?
You are looking at this as white vs black.
You're the one who looked at it like that. I SPECIFICALLY said you can't say that someone is 5xs more likely to be a murderer and 3Xs more likely to be a rapist because of the color of their skin.
I am looking at it as a group of people who obviously have a problem somewhere, and I want to find a solution to help.
Then you're as ridiculously lost about black people as they probably think most white people are. That's a mouth full of nothing to tell somebody you're 5xs more likely to be a murderer and 3Xs more likely to be a rapist than I am because of the color of your skin. But hey, let me help you find a solution after I've snidely told you the problem is your skin color.
You keep trying to use statistical measures of the past to tell folks not in those statistics what they are more likely to do in the future.
That's not statistical analysis. That's stereotyping.
As long as it stays white vs black, nothing will get accomplished. It needs to be American helping American.
You're again being silly if you think any black person is going to believe you about American helping American when you immediately stereotype them to be 5xs more likely to be a murderer and 3Xs more likely to be a rapist .