- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:11 am to RollTide1987
'may be letting ideology...'
There is no 'may' about it
There is no 'may' about it
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:17 am to RollTide1987
quote:
conducted by sociology professor D. Paul Sullins of the Catholic University
I love the upvote/downvote ratio for this.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:18 am to tedmarkuson
quote:
that's why 20 is probably an adequate sample size.
If the people that did the study admit that it's probably not an adequate sample size, why are you trying to argue differently?
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:22 am to RollTide1987
It should be obvious that same-sex parents can't offer what the "traditional" male/female unit can. Men and women are different and offer different things that children learn from.
That being said, if the study is based on 20 couples, 17 of which are lesbians, I think it's a very small sample size and not able to provide sufficient data to make any conclusions. The data supports common sense but it needs to be expanded to be more relevant.
That being said, if the study is based on 20 couples, 17 of which are lesbians, I think it's a very small sample size and not able to provide sufficient data to make any conclusions. The data supports common sense but it needs to be expanded to be more relevant.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:22 am to tedmarkuson
quote:No it's not. While the population size a sample is drawn from, can have an impact on various distributions, that's not really relevant once the population size is more than a few thousand.
that's why 20 is probably an adequate sample size
But regardless, the analyses using the properties of probability distributions rely on asymptotic theorems (central limit theorem, law of large numbers).
In other words, all of your analysis resulted in an incorrect conclusion.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:23 am to RollTide1987
quote:lol
D. Paul Sullins of the Catholic University of America
quote:just
20 same-sex couples
quote:lol
(1995 to 2008)
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:25 am to ProjectP2294
quote:Because he doesn't understand, or has chosen to ignore, the basic, widely known principles of probability and statistics.
If the people that did the study admit that it's probably not an adequate sample size, why are you trying to argue differently?
Although since he didn't add his patented Al Pacino gif, maybe ted doesn't really believe a sample size of 20 is adequate.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:33 am to rbWarEagle
quote:I normally dislike "shooting the messenger," especially if the study seems sound. It's always important to consider potential biases and conflicts of the researcher, but usually those aren't too exteme, and the study itself is what is most important.
I love the upvote/downvote ratio for this.
But given the glaring flaws of the study, and given that he is a priest, this is closer to Wakefield/Autism study, albeit his worldview is the issue rather than straight up lying in Wakefield's case.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:35 am to Lsupimp
quote:I can tell you point blank it is not ""universally accepted"", but as you say there are multiple studies, please cite one.
That's multiple studies and universally accepted.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:36 am to buckeye_vol
Trust me, the first thing I flip to is the methods section when reviewing articles but this thing would have been torn to shreds on the first page if it had been a sociology professor finding anything that aligns with a liberal worldview.
I'll leave the CLT talk to you on this one
I'll leave the CLT talk to you on this one
This post was edited on 9/1/17 at 9:38 am
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:40 am to RollTide1987
in other breaking developments - water is wet.
No sane person can possibly think that it is good for children to be raised in an atmosphere at odds with nature itself.
I have always maintained that a child is better off in a well-run institution than in the 'home' of same-sex couples.
No sane person can possibly think that it is good for children to be raised in an atmosphere at odds with nature itself.
I have always maintained that a child is better off in a well-run institution than in the 'home' of same-sex couples.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:41 am to OMLandshark
quote:Not sure of the reference, so can't address directly. Obesity is often cortisol related. Depression, anxiety, stress, sleeplessness are contributors.
It's just bizarre that gay men would be a trend with obesity.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:44 am to The Maj
quote:
There are some fricked up hetero households out there as well..
of course - but percentage wise, I would wager there is a higher percentage of 'fracked up' households amongst the same-sex community.
Putting a child in an anti-evolutionary-science environment should never be hailed as a good thing. It is amongst the worst things that can happen to a child.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:45 am to SthGADawg
quote:
quote:
I think the point is that children who grow up in traditional, stable families have the best chances at success..
ding ding ding.....we have a winner...doesn't matter who did the study...its not natural to have two daddies that frick each other in the arse raising a little girl....degeneracy promotes degeneracy
you're probably exhibit A for that claim ...
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:46 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:Well call me insane, but I think any atmosphere that his 2 loving and caring parents who provide for the needs of the children is superior to any dysfunctional atmosphere.
No sane person can possibly think that it is good for children to be raised in an atmosphere at odds with nature itself.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:46 am to RollTide1987
quote:
The study, conducted by sociology professor D. Paul Sullins of the Catholic University of America
Hard to believe they'd be an unbiased source of information.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:49 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:Amongst the worst? As in amongst abusive environments, exteme poverty environments, neglectful environments, etc.? I would wager back at you that those are far more harmful than any parental structure of a a family.
Putting a child in an anti-evolutionary-science environment should never be hailed as a good thing. It is amongst the worst things that can happen to a child.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:51 am to Salmon
quote:
I was mocking you
Didn't work.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 9:55 am to Dale51
You're confused.
Page 6 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News