Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pocahontas and DNA

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Um, you might want to peruse those links and the embedded links in them again.

    Comment


    • #47
      This is your job since you decided to use Breitbart. I used a different link which shows much better the facts.
      My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

      Comment


      • #48
        Meanwhile, a link about the DNA results because it seems (as usual) people start talking or analyzing the results without knowing what they are talking about

        Some excerpts. Bold mine for emphasis

        https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/18/o...th-warren.html

        Before Arguing About DNA Tests, Learn the Science Behind Them

        By Monday afternoon, James Freeman, an assistant editor of The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page, had fleshed out Mr. Ahrens’s arithmetic. The DNA analysis, he wrote, “suggests that the senator is somewhere between 1/64th and 1/1024th Native American.” He added: “Her genetic makeup is perhaps similar to that of the average white person in the U.S.”

        These numbers then began to ricochet around social media. They carried a clear implication: that Elizabeth Warren was no different in her Native American ancestry than a great many other white Americans.

        Both Mr. Ahrens and Mr. Freeman cited a 2014 New York Times articleas evidence for their claims. I wrote that article. So let me just say this: They’re wrong.

        ...

        How many European-Americans are like Senator Warren, with a small amount of Native American ancestry? Scientists can’t say for sure. The best clues to date come from a 2014 study carried out by researchers at 23andMe. They looked at the DNA of 160,000 customers who described themselves as being of European, African or Latino ancestry. Across all the European-Americans in the study, the average amount of Native American ancestry was 0.18 percent.

        But once again, averages can be deceptive. The researchers found that 2.7 percent of their European customers had 1 percent or more Native American ancestry. The vast majority had no detectable Native American ancestry at all.
        It’s impossible to directly compare Senator Warren’s results to the 23andMe customers because they were produced with different software.

        What we can say is that Senator Elizabeth Warren is not unique. There are millions of European-Americans who have a small amount of Native American ancestry. But it would be wrong to claim that all European-Americans do.


        It shows how people can grossly misrepresent facts when they talk about things that they do not know. The vast majority of Europeans have no detectable Native American ancestry at all, but when people calculate averages, they make it sound like every European has some level of detectable Native American ancestry...
        Last edited by pamak; 21 Oct 18, 08:06.
        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by pamak View Post
          Meanwhile, a link about the DNA results because it seems (as usual) people start talking or analyzing the results without knowing what they are talking about

          Some excerpts. Bold mine for emphasis

          https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/18/o...th-warren.html

          Before Arguing About DNA Tests, Learn the Science Behind Them

          By Monday afternoon, James Freeman, an assistant editor of The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page, had fleshed out Mr. Ahrens’s arithmetic. The DNA analysis, he wrote, “suggests that the senator is somewhere between 1/64th and 1/1024th Native American.” He added: “Her genetic makeup is perhaps similar to that of the average white person in the U.S.”

          These numbers then began to ricochet around social media. They carried a clear implication: that Elizabeth Warren was no different in her Native American ancestry than a great many other white Americans.

          Both Mr. Ahrens and Mr. Freeman cited a 2014 New York Times articleas evidence for their claims. I wrote that article. So let me just say this: They’re wrong.

          ...

          How many European-Americans are like Senator Warren, with a small amount of Native American ancestry? Scientists can’t say for sure. The best clues to date come from a 2014 study carried out by researchers at 23andMe. They looked at the DNA of 160,000 customers who described themselves as being of European, African or Latino ancestry. Across all the European-Americans in the study, the average amount of Native American ancestry was 0.18 percent.

          But once again, averages can be deceptive. The researchers found that 2.7 percent of their European customers had 1 percent or more Native American ancestry. The vast majority had no detectable Native American ancestry at all.
          It’s impossible to directly compare Senator Warren’s results to the 23andMe customers because they were produced with different software.

          What we can say is that Senator Elizabeth Warren is not unique. There are millions of European-Americans who have a small amount of Native American ancestry. But it would be wrong to claim that all European-Americans do.


          It shows how people can grossly misrepresent facts when they talk about things that they do not know. The vast majority of Europeans have no detectable Native American ancestry at all, but when people calculate averages, they make it sound like every European has some level of detectable Native American ancestry...
          You keep bouncing from European Americans to Europeans. Talk about misrepresenting the facts.

          And no, Warren is not unique. Just a typical lying politician.
          ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

          BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

          BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
            You keep bouncing from European Americans to Europeans. Talk about misrepresenting the facts.

            And no, Warren is not unique. Just a typical lying politician.


            The quote from the original article is there for you to see the obvious fact that I am always talking about the European-Americans.
            My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by pamak View Post
              Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
              You keep bouncing from European Americans to Europeans. Talk about misrepresenting the facts.

              And no, Warren is not unique. Just a typical lying politician.


              The quote from the original article is there for you to see the obvious fact that I am always talking about the European-Americans.
              No, there is a difference between Europeans and European Americans. I am an American. So is Senator Warren. One is either American or not. There is no European, Native, African, Irish, Italian, etc "American". This is a sloppily written piece, supported by you.

              And it doesn't change the fact that the article switches between European American and European. Obviously you can see how this will affect interpretation of the quote.

              Seems you need to vet your sources more carefully.
              Last edited by Gixxer86g; 21 Oct 18, 10:57.
              ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

              BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

              BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
                No, there is a difference between Europeans and European Americans. I am an American. So is Senator Warren. One is either American or not. There is no European, Native, African, Irish, Italian, etc "American". This is a sloppily written piece, supported by you.

                Seems you need to vet your sources more carefully.


                If you cannot understand that the article is talking about Americans of European ancestry, then the article is not for you...


                My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by pamak View Post
                  Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
                  No, there is a difference between Europeans and European Americans. I am an American. So is Senator Warren. One is either American or not. There is no European, Native, African, Irish, Italian, etc "American". This is a sloppily written piece, supported by you.

                  Seems you need to vet your sources more carefully.


                  If you cannot understand that the article is talking about Americans of European ancestry, then the article is not for you...

                  Oh I fully understand. It's just that if your sources are sloppy, how can they be trusted?
                  ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                  BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                  BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
                    Oh I fully understand. It's just that if your sources are sloppy, how can they be trusted?



                    They are not sloppy at all. It is just that your reading is sloppy and you do not understand what they say. From the quoted part of the article it is OBVIOUS that it isa talking about the Americans with a European ancestry when it talks about the "European-Americans"

                    How many European-Americans are like Senator Warren, with a small amount of Native American ancestry? Scientists can’t say for sure. The best clues to date come from a 2014 study carried out by researchers at 23andMe. They looked at the DNA of 160,000 customers who described themselves as being of European, African or Latino ancestry. Across all the European-Americans in the study, the average amount of Native American ancestry was 0.18 percent.

                    Feel free to tell us the proper way to write the above paragraph...
                    My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                      Being 1/1024th Native American doesn't make you Native American...
                      Being born in America makes you a native American. Thus, I'm one, born in Indiana. No 1/1024th about it.
                      The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by pamak View Post
                        This is your job since you decided to use Breitbart. I used a different link which shows much better the facts.
                        I quoted sufficiently to prove my point. If you want more detail, that's on you. My job isn't necessarily to convince you and you alone. In fact, I generally don't try because of your granitic obstinance to both facts and reality. Also, Breitbart is not a source requiring massive supporting proof, like say, CNN or the WaPo where bias and sloppy political reporting have become the norm do.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                          Also, Breitbart is not a source requiring massive supporting proof, like say, CNN or the WaPo where bias and sloppy political reporting have become the norm do.
                          Factcheck.org mentions Breitbart as a source of false claims on numerous occasions. So does Snopes.com. And the same can be said for news outlets on the other end of the political spectrum. The sad fact is that confirmation bias is commonplace and we are all guilty of it to varying degrees.

                          I do my best to circumvent fake or misleading news by consulting as many sources as possible. It is difficult to find the truth, and becoming increasingly so. Sometimes I am disappointed to learn my preconceived bias is incorrect and I consider that outcome to be a reward for my persistence.



                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by JustAGuy View Post

                            Factcheck.org mentions Breitbart as a source of false claims on numerous occasions. So does Snopes.com. And the same can be said for news outlets on the other end of the political spectrum. The sad fact is that confirmation bias is commonplace and we are all guilty of it to varying degrees.

                            I do my best to circumvent fake or misleading news by consulting as many sources as possible. It is difficult to find the truth, and becoming increasingly so. Sometimes I am disappointed to learn my preconceived bias is incorrect and I consider that outcome to be a reward for my persistence.
                            That's like saying sources with opposing opinions disagree with Breitbart. I try to look objectively at these things. Breitbart is obviously slanted to the Right some, and that puts them in the minority as a position and source. The Left normally will vilify any Right leaning source automatically. Look how FOX regularly gets dismissed as BS without even consideration.

                            If you look at the overall scoring Factcheck does (along with Politifact) they both regularly, and consistently, find Republicans less credible and reliable than Democrats.

                            https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...st-republicans

                            One way this bias can be handled initially is to move their scoring system one or two points towards truth for the Republicans and one or two points towards false for Democrats automatically, before reading the article. You can then judge for yourself based on the factual information they present.

                            Right now, I consider CNN and the WaPo on political matters to be so badly biased that their credibility is automatically nil until proven otherwise on some story.

                            In the case of this thread, Breitbart shows very clearly that Warren did and said the things I claimed. That she has extensively used the Native American story, along with other clear falsehoods and embellishments to advance her career. When caught, she has offered a proverbial fig leaf defense then expected everyone to simply forget she ever said or did those things. Sort of a "That's in the past. What matters is the present. Ignore what I did back then, it isn't important or relevant."

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Interesting development - turns out her DNA was never compared to that of any American Indians, but to a sample from Central America.
                              Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                                That's like saying sources with opposing opinions disagree with Breitbart. I try to look objectively at these things. Breitbart is obviously slanted to the Right some, and that puts them in the minority as a position and source. The Left normally will vilify any Right leaning source automatically. Look how FOX regularly gets dismissed as BS without even consideration.

                                If you look at the overall scoring Factcheck does (along with Politifact) they both regularly, and consistently, find Republicans less credible and reliable than Democrats.


                                https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...st-republicans

                                One way this bias can be handled initially is to move their scoring system one or two points towards truth for the Republicans and one or two points towards false for Democrats automatically, before reading the article. You can then judge for yourself based on the factual information they present.

                                Right now, I consider CNN and the WaPo on political matters to be so badly biased that their credibility is automatically nil until proven otherwise on some story.

                                In the case of this thread, Breitbart shows very clearly that Warren did and said the things I claimed. That she has extensively used the Native American story, along with other clear falsehoods and embellishments to advance her career. When caught, she has offered a proverbial fig leaf defense then expected everyone to simply forget she ever said or did those things. Sort of a "That's in the past. What matters is the present. Ignore what I did back then, it isn't important or relevant."


                                Apparently you did not read the link I provided which contradicts the claim that she used her heritage to advance her career. And unlike Breitbart, my link gives specific dates regarding when the decision was made to hire Warren and when she was shown as a minority professor together with specific interviews with people who were involved in the hiring process and the people who recorded her as a minority professor.

                                Right now your double standards when you automatically reject CNN and WaPo sources while you automatically accept Breitbart's claim that Warren used her heritage to advance her career DESPITE the fact that I presented a much more serious and in-depth investigation with specific details which contradict this claim. The hypocrisy is obvious, especially when you have admitted in previous threads that Breitbart is "automatically" a "fake news" site, just like CNN and that it is fallacious to dismiss any source on the basis of who that source is

                                https://forums.armchairgeneral.com/f...92#post4520692

                                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                                Breitbart, no more than CNN, is automatically a "fake news" site. Both have a heavy political slant, as do many other news outlets. Attacking the source rather than addressing what they said or reported is simply applying the Genetic Fallacy to it. So, dismissing Breitbart, CNN, the WaPo, the Huffington Post, or any other source on the basis of who that source is, is simply fallacious on the face of it.

                                So, I addressed your source with the link I provided.

                                https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nat...O0K/story.html

                                Do you have to say anything about the information that was presented there, or are you just not interested in making any evaluation about it because you automatically accept everything you read @ Bretbart?
                                Last edited by pamak; 21 Oct 18, 17:54.
                                My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X