Doesn't matter that it's true..

https://defconnews.com/2024/02/26/commentary-black-prof-forced-to-get-armed-secu
rity-after-showing-cops-do-not-kill-blacks-disproportionately/

 That youtube video is the tip of the iceberg.

Eegore wrote on 09/07/24 at 07:02:37:


So:
"... [A]n economist who worked hard on a study and verified the results were accurate is punished for those results because they don’t fit into a narrative. ..."

"...Economist Roland Fryer was caught in a frenzy after publishing a paper that found no racial bias in police shootings, recalling that he had colleagues warning him that his study could be career-ending...."

You believe it is TRUE,
   or not TRUE ?

Eegore wrote on 09/07/24 at 14:37:28:


Interesting.

"... and verified the results were accurate is punished for those results because they don’t fit into a narrative. ..."

So that statement could totally be 100% accurate.

(And have nothing to do with any 'sexual misconduct allegations')

Eegore wrote on 09/07/24 at 23:14:56:


Here are excerpts of what Fryer said in the article listed on the first post of this subject.
(The Direct quotes from Fryer, are underlined)

Which ones did the source lie ?
Any time line on your, opinion, if the information is TRUE ?


The Harvard professor shared his experience with Bari Weiss, a journalist for The Free Press, when he published the paper researching racial bias in Houston policing.
The issue came with the latter part of his study that found:

(F). [N]ot only were blacks not more likely to be shot at than their white counterparts, but it was more likely police would use their firearms against the white suspects.

Fryer shared that even he was surprised with the results. He recruited eight fresh research assistants to redo the data, and they found the same results as before. But according to the professor:

(F) [A]fter he confirmed the data and was ready to share, that’s when all hell broke loose.

He stated:

(F)It was a 104-page dense, academic economics paper with a 150-page appendix, OK?
It was posted for four minutes before I got my first email ‘This is full of s–t!’
He shared that his colleagues doubted the results, pointing to flaws in the methods he used despite the fact that they used the same methods in their own research.

He said:

(F) I had colleagues take me into the side and say, ‘Don’t publish this, you’ll ruin your career,’ I said, ‘What are you talking about?’ I said, ‘What’s wrong with it? Do you believe the first part? Yes. Do you believe the second part? Well … the issue is they don’t fit together.’

Even then-dean of Harvard Claudine Gay claimed his research “exhibited a pattern of behavior” that did not meet the expectations of the university.
Fryer then shared a story about how he had to be escorted by a bodyguard to go buy diapers for his newborn because of the immense backlash he faced for his findings.
Is this bizarre or typical of the degraded state of sociocultural health in America?

To wit:
[A]n economist who worked hard on a study and verified the results were accurate is punished for those results because they don’t fit into a narrative.
… said his colleagues told him:

(F)f the second half of his study also showed bias in police violence that he should publish it in full, but as it was, it shouldn’t be a single study.
Even then-dean of Harvard Claudine Gay claimed his research “exhibited a pattern of behavior” that did not meet the expectations of the university.
Fryer then shared a story about how he had to be escorted by a bodyguard to go buy diapers for his newborn because of the immense backlash he faced for his findings.

[A]n economist who worked hard on a study and verified the results were accurate is punished for those results because they don’t fit into a narrative.
One would think that results showing blacks are less likely to be shot by police would be a positive. Proof that supposed institutional racism is being mispresented should be good news for everyone, yes?

Unfortunately, the mental illness of the Left requires a category of victims for them to manipulate.

(F) So, when something comes out that concretely shows that the narrative the liberal media has worked so hard to craft is a sham, it’s immediately in their sights.

Final thoughts, two imperatives: Imagine the amount of valuable research and sociocultural advancement that has been suppressed because it did not fit the liberal narrative.

And likewise, imagine the valuable findings that are distorted to meet liberal biases for publication.


How interesting:
"dean of Harvard Claudine Gay claimed his research “exhibited a pattern of behavior” that did not meet the expectations of the university."

Don't see any,  'allegations' of ''sexual misconduct'.

Yet that does not matter even if true.
As a POTUS, on TV, said :
" I Did Not Have Sex With That Woman "
And it was PROVED, beyond a shadow of a doubt, he did.

And-just over half this Nation did NOT CARE he lied !

Lefty mantra

White cops are Hunting unarmed black men!
The unarmed black man is more likely to be killed in any interaction with a white cop than anyone else.

Black educated man proves it wrong.

Immediately castigated instead of applauded for proving the lie. The LIE is part of the foundation for the False claims of foundational racism, agreed with and promoted by the higher up.

Are there racist cops? Yep!
And bank tellers and doctors, but what They are isn't the majority nor do they have any ability to make Their racism control or affect the ideas of society at large.

So, the paper, used intelligently, Should help erase some of the racial divide.
Stop believing lies AND stop having the emotional responses that those Lies make understandable. Accept that what we've been told has been Proven false.
Now nobody needs to hate cops for being murderous racists.
Seems like that Ottsta be a Good Thing..

If government and/or media Wanted racial harmony, this would be being pit forth on every news station on TV.
The indoctrination that has been created has been to divide.
You Do remember the Mike Brown thing, right?
The bodycam PROVED everything the cop said. He had a Busted Orbital bone.
But they Would NOT let it out. It took weeks before they showed it. And that Further Investigation they used to justify the refusal ??  It was clearly a lie.

The whole time they withheld the evidence that proved Brown was trying to steal the cops gun and the fight was brutal and the cops life was on the line, the media kept the flames of racism fanned HIGH.
And the Evidence that didn't suggest, didn't indicate, but PROVED there was No Reason for anyone to be pisstawff about Brown being killed,was being withheld.  He deserved it, and anyone in the cops place would have shot him.
They Want us at each others throats.
Indoctrination..

But who added that up?

It's not that hard, folks.

Eegore wrote on 09/08/24 at 10:42:26:


So you know that statement, was not about the research, but about the allegations, How ?

Would it not be the, 'paper/study/research', 'information from the original source',  be the original source ?

And why would Fryer put a 'allegation' in his paper ?

So you know that statement, was not about the research, but about the allegations, How ?


 Because the entirety of her statement, not the single sentence, was made while discussing his sexual assault allegations.  Also it was made before the research in question was published and read by the human making the statement.  But to be fair time and space as we know it never mattered here before.



Would it not be the, 'paper/study/research', 'information from the original source',  be the original source ?

 No.  The article JOG referenced copied almost word for word from another website.  In my statement "information from the original source" is in reference to the website that originally posted the information.  So maybe JOG's reference poorly copied the information, or selectively left-out the context and timeframe of the quote.  


And why would Fryer put a 'allegation' in his paper ?

 He didn't.  The sexual allegations happened years before the paper was published and as such have the potential to be commented on prior to publication.  A website took a statement directed towards his sexual allegations and stated it was exclusively about his research.  This is not TRUE.

 I can not say the information in his research paper is TRUE until further assessments are made.  The website that is referenced in the original post here lied about one human's statement about that specific research module.  I will not use the lying website's word and repeat what I am TOLD it says, I will instead look for myself, until I do I will not say it is TRUE.

 None of this matters as I already stated that I completely believe organizations would refuse to support information that says police aren't racist/biased in fear of uneducated backlash.