Forum

Free news

FREE blog

Donate

Search

Subscribe

jews/911

Feedback

dna

Gun poll

RCC

AIDS

Home

Fathers

Surveys

Holocaust

IQ

14th Amdt

19th Amdt

Israelites

NWO

Homicide

Blacks

Whites

Signatory

Talmud

Watchman

Gaelic

Traitors

Health?

 

 

 

bullet
Feminist "debate tactics"--THEIR way, or NO way!
bullet

 

 

 

 

 

From: thorain@my-deja.com
Subject: Re: Troll alert - parallel thread
Date: 01 Jun 1999 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <7j113l$8re$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
References: <yEsU2.834$jo3.2083@news.megsinet.net> <19990425070051.19340.00001011@ng-ce1.aol.com> <awFU2.23$Sc5.227@news.megsinet.net> <7gng1l$nnf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <DSOX2.2563$Sc5.9732@news.megsinet.net> <7gq5vm$3aa$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <6S1Y2.2936$Sc5.10516@news.megsinet.net> <7h8vsb$nhe$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <VDVZ2.12$8N2.257@news.megsinet.net> <7hfqhp$5ah$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7hh9k8$515$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7hijgr$4dl$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7hjqpl$98$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7hp5gr$dic$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <MW003.24$Z01.3015@news.megsinet.net> <37415b9f.471319932@news.monmouth.com> <7hvkca$t2m$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3744077d.646389599@news.monmouth.com> <37440F20.DFB41E77@fmr.com> <7i1uej$ipj$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7i4hu6$dru$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7i74lq$2hg$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7i8ufc$705$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7ies4s$9oe$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <374b1304.107964715@news.monmouth.com> <7ihd61$4jc$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7in7il$aou$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7iqkim$8ln$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x39.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 199.228.142.7
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Jun 01 16:18:07 1999 GMT
Newsgroups: alt.education,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,alt.parents.solutions
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows 98)
In article <7iqkim$8ln$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
  manifesto@christianparty.net wrote:
> In article <7in7il$aou$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>   thorain@my-deja.com wrote:
> > In article <7ihd61$4jc$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> >   manifesto@christianparty.net wrote:
> > > In article <374b1304.107964715@news.monmouth.com>,
> > >   WStreett@shell.monmouth.com (Wilbur Streett) wrote:
> > > > manifesto@christianparty.net wrote:
> > > > >Frankly, judging from your previous assertion that "this data
> > doesn't
> > > > >correlate", the odds of your even understanding any of the
above
> > are
> > > > >REAL small.  Nonetheless, it will be shared with you if you so
> > > request,
> > > > >in order to give you the opportunity to prove that there are
some
> > > > >electrons wiggling around that cranium.
> > > > >
> > > > >The page http://fathersmanifesto.com/crosslinktimss1.htm
> contains
> > > some,
> > > > >but not ALL, of the assumptions, some of which are assumptions
> > about
> > > why
> > > > >the UN data differs so much from the TIMSS data.
> > > >
> > > > Naw, he won't answer that.. he didn't answer my explaination of
> the
> > > mental
> > > > age being a factor in the test scores either.
> > > >
> > > > Wilbur
> > >
> > > Agreed, Wilbur.  He never responds when a fact which disputes his
> > > feminist perspective of the world is posted, so here is the
specific
> > > disconnect between the TIMSS data base and the UN Statistical
> > Abstract,
> > > 37th Edition http://fathersmanifesto.com/crosslinktimss1.htm
> > >
> > > The TIMSS data shows that the percent of men teachers is HIGHER
than
> > the
> > > UN data shows it to be, by:
> > >
> > > Switzerland 20%
> > > Japan 3%
> > > Norway 30%
> > > Sweden 36%
> > > Spain 33%
> > > Iran 3%
> > > Canada 4%
> > > Hong Kong 34%
> > > New Zealand 2%
> > > France 24%
> > > Korea 3%
> > > England 33%
> > > Ireland 18%
> > > Singapore 11%
> > > Portugal 13%
> > >
> > > And the TIMSS data shows the percent of men teachers to be LOWER
> than
> > > the UN data by:
> > >
> > > Iceland 10%
> > > Cyprus 6%
> > > Belgium 13%
> > > Czech Republic 48%
> > > Hungary 4%
> > > Russia 57%
> > >
> > > Some of these smaller differences could be because of the
different
> > > years the data is collected, different definitions, etc.   But
WHAT
> > can
> > > explain differences of 30% and 40% and even 57%??!
> > >
> >
> > Thank you, John, for this excellent example of your ineptitude,
> alluded
> > to above.
> >
> > The reason for the difference is because they are two different
> > populations. One is a measure of the percent of teachers of a
country
> > that are male. The other is a measure of the percent of teachers of
a
> > country WHOSE CLASSES TOOK THE TIMSS who are male. These are not the
> > same group.
> >
> > > WHICH data is accurate?  Why does the TIMSS data have such low
> > > correlation between TIMSS scores and the percent of male teachers,
> >
> > BOTH data sets are accurate. YOU are confused. The TIMSS data shows
> > 'such a low correlation' because there is no significant correlation
> > between the scores and the gender of the teacher.
> >
> > Let me try to explain this using very simple concepts. Try to keep
up,
> > John.
> >
> > Let C represent the total teacher population of a country.
> > Let T represent that percent of C that actually participated in the
> > TIMSS study. T is a subset of C, therefore T does not equal C. In
> fact,
> > T will be significantly smaller than C.
> >
> > The UN data represents the percent of C that are male.
> > The TIMSS data represents the percent of T that are male.
> >
> > These are INDEPENDENT measures. There is no reason to expect a
> > relationship between the two. There is no indication that the TIMSS
> > study attempted to select classes that reflected the overall
> percentage
> > of teachers in the country. Furthermore, C represents ALL of the
> > teachers, where T represents the teachers of SPECIFIC GRADE LEVELS.
> > Remember, there are actually 3 T samples (4th, 8th, 12th). Actually,
> > there are more as there were multiple tests at the 12th grade level.
> >
> > One does not expect to find the same results for two independent
> > samples. You might as well ask why the percentage of male teachers
in
> > Japan is different from the percent of male teachers in Korea.
> >
> > Since you are postulating that there is a relationship between TIMSS
> > scores and the gender of the teacher, the ONLY data set that is
> > applicable is the one that comes with the TIMSS data.
> >
> > This data HAS NOT BEEN PUBLISHED for the 12th grade tests.
> > This data SHOWS A COEFFICIENT OF 0.06 for the 8th grade sample.
> > I do not remember off the top of my head the relationship at the 4th
> > grade. Seems to me that almost all of the countries had a majority
of
> > teachers as females.
> >
> > Is this elementary concept clear to you now, John? The only
> > 'discrepancy' is in your ability to understand basic statistics.
> >
> > James Powell
>
> Whew, James, you had better stick to something simpler than teaching.
>
> You are 100% wrong, unless you now assert, AFTER you have made the
above
> blunder, that you originally intended to point out that those who take
> the TIMSS are not randomly selected, or are specially selected for
some
> characteristic.
>
> If this subset is randomly selected, then the percent of male teachers
> in the subset will be within 2-3% of the percent of male teachers in
the
> total population.  In the case of TIMSS, there is no reason to merely
> ASSUME that they were specially selected, which makes it a bit
difficult
> for you to now make that claim.
>
You miss the obvious point above, nimrod. While the selection of the
final students WAS random, the selection of the level to test was not.
Your data from the UN is for ALL of the teachers in the country. The
data from the TIMSS was for the GRADE LEVEL that participated in that
test.
Let's illustrate this, shall we?
From the SASS (Schools and Staffing in the United States: A Statistic
Profile, 1993-94)
In the Public school arena, the reported percentage of male teachers is
27.1% for this survey. This represents your 'UN statistic'.
The percentage of male teachers at the elementary level is 16.2%
(averaged between the three number reported). Let this represent the
'Primary TIMSS statistic'.
The percentage of male teachers at the secondary level is 46.7%
(averaged again). This can represent the 'TIMSS 8th grade statistic'.
I have just illustrated a variation of 10.9% to 19.6% from the National
statistic. There are no published data (to my knowledge) that breaks
down the UN statistic by educational level. Furthermore, the US example
above only breaks by broad level - the results for an individual grade
level could be much greater (or lesser) than illustrated above.
Do you now understand why you can not use the UN data to support your
claim? You are trying to use an indirect statistic to prove a direct
relationship. This is especially wrong in the case of the 4th and 8th
grade data when the actual numbers are available.
> This part of TIMSS was essentially a poll, and polls like the Gallup
> Poll can determine the characteristics of all 270 million Americans to
> an accuracy within 3%, by polling only 1,000 households--a subset of
> only .001% of the total population of households.
>
As stated before: This was NOT a poll, it was a survey. The data was
NOT used to extrapolate to a national number, unlike a Gallup Poll. It
was not intended for that purpose and there is no evidence that the
criteria for conducting such a poll were followed. It was not the
purpose, so the data may not be used to serve that purpose.
> You say:
>
> > These are INDEPENDENT measures. There is no reason to expect a
> > relationship between the two.
>
> This is a completely remarkable statement, Jimmy.  Even IF the subset
> were specially selected (i.e., if those who participated in TIMSS were
> only the honor students of the country--which is not the case with
> TIMSS), the two samples would be neither independent nor unrelated.
You
> could claim that you didn't know what the numeric relationship is, but
> even that would be wrong, because you have enough data in TIMSS to
> calculate that relationship.  And even if that data weren't available,
> there is no definition in the world, math or otherwise, which would
> enable you to claim them to be "independent".  When one is a subset of
> the other, they are DEPENDENT by definition.
>
Again: Look up the definition of dependent and independent in relation
to mathematics and scientific variables.
> And IF there is a difference between the percent of men teachers who
> teach the top scoring students within a country and the percent of men
> teachers who teach the lower scoring teachers, then both of us know
what
> that relationship would be.  Right, James?
>
No, we don't. Produce the data and we can see what the realtionship is.
> > I do not remember off the top of my head the relationship at the 4th
> > grade. Seems to me that almost all of the countries had a majority
of
> > teachers as females.
A quick check of the data reveals that only 2 of the 26 countries
participating in the primary (4th grade) TIMSS reported over 50% of the
teachers as male.
James Powell
<random noise deleted>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
 

TRAITOR McCain

jewn McCain

ASSASSIN of JFK, Patton, many other Whites

killed 264 MILLION Christians in WWII

killed 64 million Christians in Russia

holocaust denier extraordinaire--denying the Armenian holocaust

millions dead in the Middle East

tens of millions of dead Christians

LOST $1.2 TRILLION in Pentagon
spearheaded torture & sodomy of all non-jews
millions dead in Iraq

42 dead, mass murderer Goldman LOVED by jews

serial killer of 13 Christians

the REAL terrorists--not a single one is an Arab

serial killers are all jews

framed Christians for anti-semitism, got caught
left 350 firemen behind to die in WTC

legally insane debarred lawyer CENSORED free speech

mother of all fnazis, certified mentally ill

10,000 Whites DEAD from one jew LIE

moser HATED by jews: he followed the law

f.ck Jesus--from a "news" person!!

1000 fold the child of perdition

 

Hit Counter

 

Modified Saturday, March 11, 2017

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party