Zach WeinersmithNiche gripe: pop sci books that cite a psych study and say something like "people who [x] are more likely to [y]" without mentioning the effect size, and then treat the result as if it's a statement about humanity. Like, in science a 3% increase is HUGE, but probably doesn't mean a lot about how to think about humans at large.
Eleanor
Carl (He/Him)You could relabel that as "Genetic between-group differences in humans" and it would be essentially unchanged.
(looks like he's @vaiseys here)
Koantig@eleanorrees
Nice! That reminds me of how the misleading "statistically significant" should be rephrased to "statistically different" instead.
Chris Johnson@eleanorrees @ZachWeinersmith Excellent visualization.
dragonfrogIn a lot of areas, the members of those groups that get all the attention are the ones waaaaay at the edges of their respective bell curves - elite athletes, performers, academics, etc.
Then you get moderately physically active dudes who see the slowest man's Olympic 100m sprint time was 0.6 seconds faster than the fastest woman's time, and go "I'm a man, I must be able to outrun Elaine Thompson-Herah - after all Bingtian Su could and he only finished 6th."
Very Human Robot@eleanorrees @ZachWeinersmith this was true when Republicans were "chamber of commerce" types.
I don't think the overlap between actual fascists and the mainstream center left is all that large, these days...
I don't think the overlap between actual fascists and the mainstream center left is all that large, these days...