Making it all up…..THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES SCANDAL

Making It All Up

The behavioral sciences scandal

by  Andrew Ferguson at the Weekly Standard:

(False science has become remarkably popular among today’s American left, that is among today’s university campuses from American coast to American coast.   “ONWARD” is the conclusion to a rather lengthy article from the Weekly Standard, reviewing one of many frauds and inventions in the social and weather sciences which have no basis in truth, but winsome in fraud and politics.

It is my view that fraud science accompanies the feminist movement.   By nature the human female has little interest in seeking truth.   She is born ditsy and incurious.  Emotions dictate reason……not evidence.   She can learn adjustments in certain fields in and out of science, but SECURITY is her basic drive in life……The authoritarian state is right down her natural alley…..especially if the ‘she’ is childless.

Feminism is America’s new McCarthyism…..but more universally intolerant than  a drive to seek out Soviet spies whatever the case.    The feminist already has sold America the bull that there is no difference between the human male and animal beyond “socialization” and that there is a war against women.

Please read the entire article below to learn more about fraud in science…..and then move on to explore the villainy associated with those who oppose the leftist myth than western man is causing the end of  today’s weather and therefor the human race.

“ONWARD

A few days after his report on the Reproducibility Project, Shankar Vedantam was back at his post. He sounded much better, and with good reason: He had found a new study. Israeli researchers had examined why girls, who do better than boys on math tests, shy away from math courses when they get to high school. This is a very hot topic in social science, and in journalism.

Perhaps chastened by the findings of the Reproducibility Project, Vedantam told listeners that the study would someday need to be replicated, but for now .  .  .

“The new study suggests,” Vedantam said, “that some of these outcomes might be driven by the unconscious bias of elementary school teachers.”

“Suggests .  .  . some of .  .  . might be .  .  . ” He was showing admirable restraint.

But then he must have figured, what the hell. In the rest of his report he treated the bias as unassailable fact.

So did the researchers. NPR listeners, if they had the energy, could have downloaded the study for themselves. They would have seen firsthand that the study compared apples and oranges, that it was statistically suspect, and that it recorded no instance of actual bias but simply assumed what it hoped to prove: that the bias of elementary school teachers was keeping women out of mathematics.

Vedantam showed great sympathy for these deluded teachers, most of them female, who were victimizing their female students without knowing it.

“It’s hard to imagine that these teachers actually have conscious animosity toward the girls in their classroom,” said NPR’s social science reporter. “Much more likely these biases are operating at an unconscious level.”

Not anymore! The headline over Vedantam’s NPR blog said it all: “Hard Evidence: Teachers’ Unconscious Biases Contribute to Gender Disparity.”

Hand in hand with journalism, Science marches on and on.”

Andrew Ferguson is a senior editor at The Weekly Standard.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/making-it-all_1042807.html?page=2

The Real Obama Doctrine, by Niall Ferguson at the Wall Street Journal

“I have spent much of the past seven years trying to work out what Barack Obama’s strategy for the United States truly is. For much of his presidency, as a distinguished general once remarked to me about the commander in chief’s strategy, “we had to infer it from speeches.”

At first, I assumed that the strategy was simply not to be like his predecessor—an approach that was not altogether unreasonable, given the errors of the Bushadministration in Iraq and the resulting public disillusionment. I read Mr. Obama’s 2009 Cairo speech—with its Quran quotes and its promise of “a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world”—as simply the manifesto of the Anti-Bush.

But what that meant in practice was not entirely clear. Precipitate withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq, but a time-limited surge in Afghanistan. A “reset” with Russia, but seeming indifference to Europe. A “pivot” to Asia, but mixed signals to China. And then, in response to the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Libya, complete confusion, the nadir of which was the September 2013 redline fiasco regarding the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons in Syria and Mr. Obama’s declaration that “America is not the global policeman.”

An approximation of an Obama strategy was revealed in April last year, at the end of a presidential trip to Asia, when White House aides told reporters that the Obama doctrine was “Don’t do stupid sh–.”

I now see, however, that there is more to it than that.”     Please read the entire article below:

http://www.wsj.com/article_email/the-real-obama-doctrine-1444429036-lMyQjAxMTI1MjEwMDgxMTA1Wj

The Vacuous Charles Blow of the New York Times’ Claims Dr. Ben Carson is Always Out

Those bothering to read Charles Blow know intellectually Mr. Blow is always OUT  ….and certainly  isn’t even a doctor.

It is  understandable to believe that  the Marxland  Times man Blow has never met a guy so sincere, honest, solid, succinct speaking and clear thinking American as Ben Carson, in his entire life. If he had, the Times likely would never had hired Blow, or anyone with such high quality connections, no matter how distant.

One can tell Mr. Carson is NOT a New Yorker. He is an adult American male Christian with all of their blessings, a retired neurosurgeon, and a candidate for our nation’s presidency. Vacuous leftist Blow sells victimhood, feminism, and black racism for the Times. Both are good at what they do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/08/opinion/with-ben-carson-the-doctor-is-always-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=1

Are Republicans Too Intimidated by Political Correctness to Expose the Truth behind the Collapse of Urban Black Civility?

Paid to Stay Single

This article from the National Center for Policy Analysis is today’s version of the LBJ era tax code and welfare benefits  part of his Great Society socialism, which began the destruction  of the once civilized American Negro urban  family.   Then, even more decisively than now, the LBJ government  offered more financial rewards per child to urban ghetto unmarried mothers than those married, the more in number, the greater the reward.    Fathers, marriage soon disappeared.  Enter Black Lives Matter hoodlums,  brutal crimes,  and its mass violence.

Today with the Court’s  destruction of the institution of marriage itself,  soon the majority of  American children will be financially fathered by Obamaling Washington.

Please read the following article from NCPA:

“Recent reform of the tax code and welfare benefits structure have nearly eliminated the penalty for married couples. But according to an R Street policy study, a major disincentive has been created against marriage for cohabitating partners.

Depending on the relationship between cohabiters and their combined and relative earnings, getting married can result in bonuses of as much as 11 percent of their combined income or penalties of more than about 32 percent of their combined income.

• In Arkansas, for example, if a nonparent recipient of means-tested social-welfare benefits marries a parent of two who also receives state benefits, the couple will lose 32 percent of benefit income.
• Penalties can be avoided by failing to disclose paternity or misreporting the extent to which food and utility costs are shared, encouraging contempt for the law.
• While unmarried, many of these cohabiting couples receive means-tested government assistance, even while married couples with lower incomes do not.

A major problem with the current system is the sudden loss of social welfare benefits when combined income for married couples suddenly increases. This is the case for couples who marry while receiving benefits through Medicaid, WIC and HUD. For these programs, benefits do not phase-out, but instead continue unchanged as income rises and then suddenly terminate entirely if income exceeds the eligibility threshold by even one dollar.

Means-based social-welfare programs could adopt a policy similar to the married-filing-jointly option in the tax code. As in the tax code, that would not mean ignoring all of a cohabiting household’s higher income. Rather, an adjustment could be made to reflect society’s interest in stable family arrangements.

Source: Douglas J. Besharov and Neil Gilbert, “Marriage Penalties in the Modern Social-Welfare State,” R Street, September 2015.

– See more at: http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=26072&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD#sthash.GMnZSqrg.dpuf