- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Researchers faked study to push divisive and harmful racial narrative
Posted on 5/3/25 at 11:34 pm to the808bass
Posted on 5/3/25 at 11:34 pm to the808bass
quote:
non-replicable, those studies continue to be cited. Even though we know they were bullshite to start with.
It's truly a house of cards.
Stupid design, more so the execution.
0
Posted on 5/3/25 at 11:35 pm to the808bass
Disgusting. These are 4cubbies people, fellow travelers.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 11:37 pm to Azkiger
I’ve done a study. It’s titled “Liars Lie.” Imma need some peer review.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 11:38 pm to Azkiger
CubbiesDS is really a thing apparently.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 11:39 pm to Azkiger
They’re evil plain and simple
Posted on 5/4/25 at 12:02 am to 4cubbies
quote:
CubbiesDS is really a thing apparently.
Yep, I'm deranged, not the researchers busted cooking stats so simpletons like yourself could go out and mindlessly parrot them.
Posted on 5/4/25 at 12:03 am to Azkiger
I fricking hate science RN - so hard
Posted on 5/4/25 at 12:04 am to Canada_Baw
Don’t hate science. Science is fine.
Hate Scientism.
Hate Scientism.
Posted on 5/4/25 at 12:05 am to the808bass
Hate the ism’s.
Hate
Hate
hate the ism’s.
Sexy hook.
Hate
Hate
hate the ism’s.
Sexy hook.
Posted on 5/4/25 at 12:25 am to the808bass
quote:
Center for Antiracism Research for Health Equity.
The irony of that f*cking name. A completely racist f*cking institution claiming to research anti-racism. Every outcome of every f*cking study made by that racist f*cking organization was preordained.
But you know for a f*cking fact that SFP and 4Chubby believed them all.
This post was edited on 5/4/25 at 12:26 am
Posted on 5/4/25 at 6:43 am to Azkiger
Research is a FOR PROFIT industry funded largely by governments with vested interests in specific results.
Democrats laud science so much because they know they can manipulate it to say virtually anything they want it to say.
Democrats laud science so much because they know they can manipulate it to say virtually anything they want it to say.
Posted on 5/4/25 at 7:56 am to Azkiger
I think people under appreciate how prevalent this is in academia. Not just in race studies, but in all of the social sciences.
Think money laundering, but in the thousands of low rated academic journals. Science laundering. Pushing junk science through a dummy journal to give it an air of legitimacy even though it’s actually fake.
That’s not 90% of the academic literature of anything… but it’s a big enough chunk that it’s fricking with a lot of social systems.
Think money laundering, but in the thousands of low rated academic journals. Science laundering. Pushing junk science through a dummy journal to give it an air of legitimacy even though it’s actually fake.
That’s not 90% of the academic literature of anything… but it’s a big enough chunk that it’s fricking with a lot of social systems.
Posted on 5/4/25 at 8:00 am to Azkiger
Institutional corruption…. it’s rampant, and one of the hallmarks of cultural Marxism
Posted on 5/4/25 at 8:01 am to Azkiger
So... Tuesday
Posted on 5/4/25 at 11:53 am to Azkiger
quote:LINK
But the study’s methods have been called into question. A September 2024 replication effort concluded that the original study authors did not statistically control for very low birth weight newborns at the highest risk of dying. Applying that control zeroed out any statistically significant effect of racial concordance on infant mortality.
Hilariously:
quote:
The study originally asserted that white babies died less frequently with white doctors.
“White newborns experience 80 deaths per 100,000 births more with a black physician than a white physician, implying a 22% fatality reduction from racial concordance,” an unpublished draft reads.
But the study’s lead author Brad N. Greenwood wrote in the margin: “I’d rather not focus on this. If we’re telling the story from the perspective of saving black infants this undermines the narrative.”
Black doctors be raciss n sheeeit.
Posted on 5/4/25 at 12:30 pm to the808bass
quote:
The study originally asserted that white babies died less frequently with white doctors.
“White newborns experience 80 deaths per 100,000 births more with a black physician than a white physician, implying a 22% fatality reduction from racial concordance,” an unpublished draft reads.
But the study’s lead author Brad N. Greenwood wrote in the margin: “I’d rather not focus on this. If we’re telling the story from the perspective of saving black infants this undermines the narrative.”
So DEI is killing white babies.
People need to go to jail for this.
Posted on 5/4/25 at 2:20 pm to Azkiger
quote:
So DEI is killing white babies.
If you agree with the study methodology, that is certainly a valid conclusion.
Posted on 5/4/25 at 4:24 pm to the808bass
quote:
Black doctors be raciss n sheeeit.
That is what the data seems to say.
In the posted youtube, I was wondering why adjusting for birth weight mattered. Low birth weight means higher mortality rates, sure, but why a difference with the race of the doctor?
The explanation is that the low birth rate babies went to specialists, and the specialists were mostly white (or at least not black?). So the arithmetic is that non-black doctors got the toughest cases, so had the highest mortality rates. Not a surprise at all.
When confronted with a 2:1 disparity in outcomes, it sure should be questioned. But liberals *want* to believe it, so they don't question it. They applaud it. It was 2024 researchers who couldn't duplicate the results that uncovered (one of) the problem(s).
And a Supreme Court Justice (guess which one), used this clearly faulty data to influence her decision in a case. smh.
This post was edited on 5/4/25 at 4:26 pm
Posted on 5/4/25 at 4:27 pm to Azkiger
They tried to ruin that black guys career and was told by colleagues not to publish the study because it didn’t fit their narrative that cops are racist and shoot black people.
This was at Harvard.
I also wondered how the left was going to square away that doctors are racist but you should trust this doctor and take an experimental shot. And not just any doctor, a shrimpy white guy.
This was at Harvard.
I also wondered how the left was going to square away that doctors are racist but you should trust this doctor and take an experimental shot. And not just any doctor, a shrimpy white guy.
This post was edited on 5/4/25 at 4:34 pm
Posted on 5/4/25 at 5:03 pm to MidWestGuy
quote:
When confronted with a 2:1 disparity in outcomes, it sure should be questioned.
As soon as you hear the supposed results of the study, you know it’s bullshite. You just don’t know why.
That squares with the general issues of peer reviewed grift that goes on. Many studies can’t be replicated. And most professionals can spot up front the ones that won’t be replicated. So why are they being published. Because it’s a Rube Goldberg machine of Scientism.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News