bullying

[007Salt]

u.s people fucked the world. change my mind

The government did not the people. Or I'll say the people in the government who have the power to fuck the world over.

[rsy]

u.s people fucked the world. change my mind

Yeah they're savages here, they fuck everyone

[Cometk]

Welcome to page 15 readers, you have crossed the threshold and before I bid you adieu here is your final warning:

sometimes Dolan is right, sometimes Umeu is right, but rest assured, the debate will always be insufferable

[fightinfrenchman]

Welcome to page 15 readers, you have crossed the threshold and before I bid you adieu here is your final warning:

sometimes Dolan is right, sometimes Umeu is right, but rest assured, the debate will always be insufferable

I want to see umeu and Dolan debate which Superdreadnaught Rail Cannon is best

[deleted_user]

u̶.̶s̶.̶ people fucked the world. change my mind

agreed

[deleted_user0]

It kinda depends on what you're studying. Some kinds of traits have such subtle differences that you need very large samples to get significant results. For differences that manifest themselves in more binary ways, smaller samples can do fine too.

Eh? Do you speak more than one language seems very binary to me. Yes, or no.

The other study was far from binary, and in fact, the differences they did find were very small and subtle, yet according to you enough to say something about over a billion people.

Must be that one year psychology course talking.

Whatever you need to justify your crazy shit mate. But you are contradicting yourselfn

Tbh, you just sound like you are in denial that there are a couple of fields in medicine, neuroscience, psychology that have been studying such differences between men and women, between different ethnic groups for decades already. It really doesn't matter much that you're one guy on a gaming forum who doubts the validity of their work. Because that body of knowledge keeps growing, keeps accumulating and it's actually practically useful in the everyday practice of medicine, psychology and other fields.

There's a whole body of research on health disparities in pain perception, pain conditions prevalence, in the way people target their empathy and so on.

Sample of 337 patients
http://www.pain-initiative-un.org/doc-c ... 20pain.pdf

Sample of 4730 patients
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17552045

Sample of 3669 patients:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 0002650138

1557 patients:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12468000

Etc, etc. Whatever, m9, keep believing that everything you don't like is "socially constructed" and the result of evil ideologies, and biology only builds decent (like Rousseau's noble savage meme), domestic and mostly similar organisms. Nature will keep defying your expectations, because it lives on conflict, difference and competition, not on sameness and global spiritual rasta vibes of oneness into Jah.

Nah, i didnt deny anything lol. Actually youre denying that people speak more than one language. According to you 100 votes from ppl all over the world with different backgrounds wont tell you anything meaningful but hard to measure reactions from 50 hongkong students is enough to make generalisations about over a billion people. Somewhere there is something wrong. Its up to you to accept or deny it.

In any case, those studies don't point at the exact cause of the difference. There are so many variables, and they're not able to isolate the the variable that causes it, hence every research conclusion you've just posted is contradicted by other research. Then you just dismiss the other research and believe only 1 side, while i suspend my judgment and believe neither to be true. One of them could be, neither of them could be, or perhaps theyre both partially true. You're actually the fanatic here lol, stop trying to pretend you're all rational because youve posted a few links to research you've hardly read except an excerpt and which implications you dont even fully understand.

African americans, caucasians, hispanics etc aren't even one homogenic group, so if it's based on "race", it's bs anyway. They should check by ancestry, which means that "african americans" from certain african regions or with a different "caucasian" mix for the american, might have a totally different genetic make up. Yet they're just lumped in together as black or african american. But whatever, as long as you can just label everything conventiently like: 1. white, 2. minority 3. Oh not needed, we already labeled everything.

[deleted_user0]

The absolute state of ESOC recently

We need more lejend....

[sebnan12]

@Cometk where are u from?

[Cometk]

@sebnan12 Long Beach baby

[spanky4ever]

Welcome to page 15 readers, you have crossed the threshold and before I bid you adieu here is your final warning:

sometimes Dolan is right, sometimes Umeu is right, but rest assured, the debate will always be insufferable

I kind of like them though. I get a lot of info from them, and the differences in perspectives are; interesting to me ^
You could say that a lot of the time, they are off-topic, but we have grown accustomed to that by now

[gibson]

Show hidden quotes

It kinda depends on what you're studying. Some kinds of traits have such subtle differences that you need very large samples to get significant results. For differences that manifest themselves in more binary ways, smaller samples can do fine too.

Eh? Do you speak more than one language seems very binary to me. Yes, or no.

The other study was far from binary, and in fact, the differences they did find were very small and subtle, yet according to you enough to say something about over a billion people.

Must be that one year psychology course talking.

Whatever you need to justify your crazy shit mate. But you are contradicting yourselfn

Tbh, you just sound like you are in denial that there are a couple of fields in medicine, neuroscience, psychology that have been studying such differences between men and women, between different ethnic groups for decades already. It really doesn't matter much that you're one guy on a gaming forum who doubts the validity of their work. Because that body of knowledge keeps growing, keeps accumulating and it's actually practically useful in the everyday practice of medicine, psychology and other fields.

There's a whole body of research on health disparities in pain perception, pain conditions prevalence, in the way people target their empathy and so on.

Sample of 337 patients
http://www.pain-initiative-un.org/doc-c ... 20pain.pdf

Sample of 4730 patients
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17552045

Sample of 3669 patients:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 0002650138

1557 patients:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12468000

Etc, etc. Whatever, m9, keep believing that everything you don't like is "socially constructed" and the result of evil ideologies, and biology only builds decent (like Rousseau's noble savage meme), domestic and mostly similar organisms. Nature will keep defying your expectations, because it lives on conflict, difference and competition, not on sameness and global spiritual rasta vibes of oneness into Jah.

Nah, i didnt deny anything lol. Actually youre denying that people speak more than one language. According to you 100 votes from ppl all over the world with different backgrounds wont tell you anything meaningful but hard to measure reactions from 50 hongkong students is enough to make generalisations about over a billion people. Somewhere there is something wrong. Its up to you to accept or deny it.

In any case, those studies don't point at the exact cause of the difference. There are so many variables, and they're not able to isolate the the variable that causes it, hence every research conclusion you've just posted is contradicted by other research. Then you just dismiss the other research and believe only 1 side, while i suspend my judgment and believe neither to be true. One of them could be, neither of them could be, or perhaps theyre both partially true. You're actually the fanatic here lol, stop trying to pretend you're all rational because youve posted a few links to research you've hardly read except an excerpt and which implications you dont even fully understand.

African americans, caucasians, hispanics etc aren't even one homogenic group, so if it's based on "race", it's bs anyway. They should check by ancestry, which means that "african americans" from certain african regions or with a different "caucasian" mix for the american, might have a totally different genetic make up. Yet they're just lumped in together as black or african american. But whatever, as long as you can just label everything conventiently like: 1. white, 2. minority 3. Oh not needed, we already labeled everything.

Come on dude, don’t you realize that my genetics and dna makeup( 12% Chinese, 25% Swiss, 25%Scottish, 12% Jewish, and 25% unknown) is almost identical to me old white roommate( all South African) and both of ours are drastically different than my current roommate( 100% Congolese) although his is the same as my other black friend( 75 percent Caribbean 25 percent European). You can tell it all by the skin color tbh

[lejend]

( 12% Chinese, 25% Swiss, 25%Scottish, 12% Jewish, and 25% unknown)

What's the other 1%?

[spanky4ever]

quoting a random sample of studies, that do not take in to account the hardship African American ppl go trough, and thinking they are the "same", is ofcorse, not good science @Dolan. I see that some of the studies you are referring to say we must study the other variables (the life conditions for example, and the hardships) but do not include them into this correlation studies. A correlation study does not say anything about the reasons , they merely state that there is a difference, but not "why". But I guess you know all about that.
I could dig deeper, but I am lazy

[sebnan12]

@sebnan12 Long Beach baby

i know honey! thats why read my previous pot u scrub

[spanky4ever]

( 12% Chinese, 25% Swiss, 25%Scottish, 12% Jewish, and 25% unknown)

What's the other 1%?

could that be the white supremacist - including YOU

[fightinfrenchman]

12% Jewish

Uh oh, this might upset some people on the forums!

[spanky4ever]

seriously, I have NEVER understood the hatred of jews. But I hate the crime that Israel is doing to the Palestinians.
Who are bullies

[spanky4ever]

12% Jewish

Uh oh, this might upset some people on the forums!

man up

[fightinfrenchman]

12% Jewish

Uh oh, this might upset some people on the forums!

man up

What?

[deleted_user]

Show hidden quotes

12% Jewish

Uh oh, this might upset some people on the forums!

man up

What?

grow a pair of ovaries

[Dolan]

Nah, i didnt deny anything lol. Actually youre denying that people speak more than one language. According to you 100 votes from ppl all over the world with different backgrounds wont tell you anything meaningful but hard to measure reactions from 50 hongkong students is enough to make generalisations about over a billion people. Somewhere there is something wrong. Its up to you to accept or deny it.

Considering that this forum requires you to use English, the sample would show selection bias and therefore conclusions would be useless. You'd be studying a very niche sample of people with similar interests and motivations to learn a foreign language, who aren't representative of the rest of the population. You'd need larger samples that have been drawn up randomly. For example, if you chose to study the ability to learn foreign languages in all the people who access ambulance services or go through a cesarean, you'd have a better chance at getting results closer to those from a random, representative sample. But if you chose to study the ability to learn foreign languages in people who joined a forum where communication is based on using English, you're going to land in a very distant point from reaching statistical significance, relative to the general population. It's really just sociology and statistics basics.

The reason why I doubt your assertion that "most people are bilingual" is not just that you didn't post any large-sample research showing this, but also because the links you provided in support of your statement are from blogs that don't quote any methodology that was used to get at those percentages. How did they define that someone qualified as bilingual? In one of the links you posted, a psychologist hillariously claimed that he considered billinguals those that use words from a foreign language while trading with neighbouring countries. You know, like British lorry drivers learning a few French words to be able to tell customs officers what kind of wares they're transporting. It doesn't matter that in any other social context, these people would never use a foreign language, because they don't relate to people from other countries much or at all, if they manage to use a few words in a limited context, they qualify as bilinguals. That's not really enough for someone to demonstrate cultural flexibility, let's get real. It's not enough for them to have to adapt to cultural norms from outside their own native culture, beyond just a temporary, very definite context.

In any case, those studies don't point at the exact cause of the difference. There are so many variables, and they're not able to isolate the the variable that causes it, hence every research conclusion you've just posted is contradicted by other research. Then you just dismiss the other research and believe only 1 side, while i suspend my judgment and believe neither to be true. One of them could be, neither of them could be, or perhaps theyre both partially true. You're actually the fanatic here lol, stop trying to pretend you're all rational because youve posted a few links to research you've hardly read except an excerpt and which implications you dont even fully understand.

Research of course doesn't only produce conclusions that point in only one direction. Some correlations or conclusions can have a better or worse track record compared to others. Depending on sampling techniques and the overall quality of researchers' work (how well they did their data collection, statistical analyses, as well as how closely they followed ethical standards, ie not omitting data that disproved their findings), there can be many factors that can lead to slightly different results even in the same population.
It's very presumptious of you to say that I don't understand the implications of this research, especially since I've read research papers for many years, I've debated research with actual people doing research and I also took research methodology classes while at university. So I do have at least a basic understanding of how to read and use research, since this was a basic requirement to get a degree.

African americans, caucasians, hispanics etc aren't even one homogenic group, so if it's based on "race", it's bs anyway. They should check by ancestry, which means that "african americans" from certain african regions or with a different "caucasian" mix for the american, might have a totally different genetic make up. Yet they're just lumped in together as black or african american. But whatever, as long as you can just label everything conventiently like: 1. white, 2. minority 3. Oh not needed, we already labeled everything.

Well, what can I say, I'm not responsible for the USA's retarded system of racial classification (retarded because it's imprecise and downright misleading). The reason why there's so much research on relevant biological markers of ethnic differences in the USA is because, over the years, medical pracitioners have noticed that there were relevant differences between groups and they could have improved medical services by targeting those issues more specifically for specific groups. It's like, for example, the case of sickle-cell anemia or differing rates of autism in people of different ethnic ancestry. So it made sense from a practical point of view for them to focus on such relevant differences to better treat their patients.
Part of their findings in the USA could be explained to be caused by minority stress or differences in socio-economic status, though I think some of those studies did control for such differences and still found that some ethnic groups reported more issues with chronic pain than others.
Another thing to take into account is that most of this research is done in the USA precisely because of the nature of that country, which is made of a collection of people from across the world, and also because they have more money than other countries to spend on this kind of research (than say Vietnam or Myanmar).
That doesn't mean other countries from outside the US don't do similar research. This study on a large sample of 994 women that was conducted in China (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/1 ... -8069-5-32) also found significant differences in pain perception between Chinese, Malay and Indian women. They even found significant association with a genetic variation in an opioid receptor (OPRM 118G). They first discovered such differences in a previous study (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18550441) on an equally large sample and then did another study that included genetic markers.

[spanky4ever]

Show hidden quotes

12% Jewish

Uh oh, this might upset some people on the forums!

man up

What?

grow a pair of ovaries

thx for giving me a really LOL

[fightinfrenchman]

@spanky4ever My comment was making fun of certain users who are anti-semitic

[spanky4ever]

@spanky4ever My comment was making fun of certain users who are anti-semitic

I Know

https://youtu.be/jVNagUGDGdg

[spanky4ever]

get this thing, I want to listen to music, ever so often