Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

No Greg, you're correct.  This research paper claiming that Geo Science is racist is complete BS.  The problem for you is that you think and have a brain that can recognize utter garbage masquerading as scholarship.  JB and RK are simply impressed with anyone who has a PhD after their name.

They don't reason, they believe as so many on the left do, that if one has a "title" that sounds impressive, then they must automatically have some sort of expertise on the subject.  

I like you, read the "scientific" article which amounted to a bunch of HS.  The very first supportive document (#1 in the footnotes) used to backup their pseudoscientific assertions began with the incredibly impressive evidence that 90% of all PhDs were awarded to "white people" as the "scientific" article claimed, which of course could only mean that the GeoSciences are Implicitly racist.  Nothing else of evidence was provided to back up the assertion.  It was pretty much just that and only that.  

Here was the 2nd paragraph (of the footnoted article):  "The geosciences are among the least diverse science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields in the United States, with almost 90% of doctoral degrees awarded to White people1. And racial diversity in PhD-level Earth scientists has not improved over the past four decades, with faculty of colour holding only 3.8% of tenured or tenure track positions in the top 100 geoscience departments2. The less diverse a field, the less welcoming it is to minorities, and the more prevalent implicit biases become. Combined with structural and social factors, the relative homogeneity in geoscience reinforces the dominant culture. As a result, women3, people from sexual and gender minorities4, and Black and Hispanic people5 all leave the field at higher rates than the average student or practitioner".

Oh, so since 90% of the PhDs are awarded to "white people'.... well then, that certainly is cocksure evidence that the GeoSciences are 'racist'.

Yes, yes, of course that's it.  The field isn't diverse, and therefore it must then be "unwelcoming" to minorities, which of course leads to the Logical conclusion (NOT) that there are "implicit biases" in said science.  

Yeah, that's some real "scholarship" there isn't it!   LOL  

BTW Greg, you may have noticed that the 2nd link that JB put forth was the academic credentials of the author the article.

Is that supposed to impress us?  She's got a piece of paper behind her name that indicates that some other academicians awarded her a PhD, therefore her logic is beyond reproach?? 

Sorry, that garners zero weight in my book, especially since her PhD is in Geology.  So then that makes her an expert in the psychological aspects of the subject of racism in Geo Sciences?  Not hardly. 

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

JB and RK are simply impressed with anyone who has a PhD after their name.

They don't reason, they believe as so many on the left do, that if one has a "title" that sounds impressive, then they must automatically have some sort of expertise on the subject.  

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

This reaction by JB towards your posting was very telling of his mindset:  "the Free Beacon headlines and analysis totally and irresponsibly distort the article and the author's message".

I would simply ask, where did the Free Beacon totally distort her article and her message?  

I actually had to reread JB's response to you and wonder to myself "was JB making a joke to you"?  

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Probably won't be chiming in too often but we'll see how it goes. 

Originally Posted by Greg Shaffer

Funny how bias influences perspectives when viewing the same material..... The bottom line is the article proposes that racism is the reason there are little other than white people in the Geo Science field. If you agree with that then there is little hope for you lol. She took a simple fact and constructed a ridiculous premise around it using the current critical race theory being pushed by the left...... I admit the news piece was fed by bias as well since it highlights one ridiculous claim in the paper to make hay with. That said the paper earned my title for it......using supposition and almost nothing in the way of proofs besides a biased perspective.....

Originally Posted by Greg Shaffer

LOL atta boy Rod.....if you cant handle the debate at hand change the narrative. No surprises there

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

"They manufacture things for right-wingers to be outraged about"

Really?  The right manufactures issues?  That's pretty funny considering that the left is outraged at everything in life and manufactures psuedo issues everywhere they go in order to politicize said issues.  

That is the story of the left, everything is a problem for them.  

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Blah Blah Blah

Originally Posted by James Lacey

And you can't ever seem to stop playing the what-about-ism card. This is just one of the many reasons it's impossible to have any rational discourse with you. You constantly engage in intellectual dishonesty like this. Believe it or not, Richard, it is possible that the Beacon manufactures outrage, and that the author of the article made some not so compelling arguments, and that the left has its own outrage machine problem. All of these can be true simultaneously, and even if the left does sometimes manufacture outrage, it in no way detracts from the point that the Beacon definitely was in this case.