Leaderboard

It is OK because it identifies those who are impacted. It makes no sense to say blacks were hurt but we cannot help them because they are black and therefore we cannot identify them. If only the black people in my neighborhood were exposed to a disease, do I also have to treat all of the white people just so that I'm not sorting according to race? If we applied your logic to tornados the insurance companies would not have to pay anyone with a claim because that would require us to sort based on the criterion of 'damage'. It is self evident that the criteria you use is the one that identifies who is impacted, whether that is damaged homes or race. You said previously that is was okay if it was used for good (see below). Now you are saying it is not okay. Did I miss something?

The clue is, you don't understand the question...

It does not provide 100% protection nor is it supposed to. But it decreases likelihood of transmitting diseases. It is pretty much the absolute minimum you could do to keep others safer.

To add to that, and to repeat a question that I do not feel has been adequately answered: why is using one criterion (e.g. race) inherently bad, if it leads to a more favourable outcome (say better health or education), whereas another one (e.g. test scores) are inherently good, if they lead to disparity and benefitting the wealthy? In other words, what is the basis to assume that certain factors are inherently bad, if not the outcomes that they cause?

QFT. Three cheers for accumulated human knowledge!

I do understand what you are saying, although while you are driving, the best solution to drive straight, is to compensate to the left. You can't realign the vehicle while it is moving. It's important to understand though that ultimately affirmative action is a policy that competitive schools have to utilise in some form in order to be operating within thr confines of the US constitution. The history of affirmative action is not static and neither is the form of the policy. Since the affirmative action executive order was enacted by the Kennedy administration, in regards to the workplace, it has evolved to cover medical care access and access to education. If we are equating schools to a vehicle out of alignment, then you'll probably be pleased to hear that when the vehicle is not moving (when the school is closed during holidays) policies are being revised and altered, staff are getting more training and guidance, unsuitable staff are removed and replaced. This includes affirmative action policies. Another key thing to learn, is that of the 4000 higher education institutions in the US, only a few hundred of those are highly competitive for places. If you want to argue that some schools don't need affirmative action, they agree with you, as evidenced by the fact that not all schools make use of such policies. The reverse racism argument was used in the Fisher vs University of Texas case. Fisher sued, arguing they had been refused admission because she was white, the real reason it turned out, was that at the time, Texas had a rule that the top 10% of their graduating class would be given automatic admission. Fisher was 82nd out of 674 students in her graduating class. She wasn't rejected from her first choice college because she was white, her grades were the problem. As for the scenario wherein two students, once compared and all things being equal besides race, that would require similar financial background, same age, same gender, same grades, both clinically able, both presenting themselves the same way with the same aptitudes and writing the same essay as each other, saying the same things in their interview, evoking the same feelings in staff and faculty who meet them, both not legacy students... What do you think the statistical likelihood is that such a thing can actually happen? That two applicants can mirror each other so completely that the only difference between them is their race? I very much doubt there is only one difference between two students, even if those students were twins. I've even heard of siblings getting extremely angry and vindictive toward each other because one got into the dream school and the other didn't. Affirmative action did not come into play in the case of siblings, perceived ability and presentation did. Now I'm not one to ignore evidence, but so far I've seen none that convinces me that affirmative action is just reverse racism. On the contrary, there have been plenty of legal challenges made to affirmative action, so far none have stuck, not even in the Supreme court. One thing that becomes quickly apparent when you read the case law, is that all the claims by applicants saying their chances for getting into their highly competitive dream school, destroyed by affirmative action, have all been rejected because they were simply not prepared or the competition was really fierce. They didn't get in because someone "stole their place" they never won a place to have it stolen by anyone in the first place. To be clear though, it's already been agreed by most of us here that there should be an available education for everyone that wants one. I do not doubt that people of all races, genders, ages, classes and creeds have been rejected from schools, when they do deserve an education. This goes back to the problem I identified earlier, logistics and resources. There are not enough teachers, staff, classrooms, labs, workshops or materials to go around so that everyone has equal access to education. Now, I think online education is addressing some of the problems, but you can only get so far without personal human mentorship. Another potential way of addressing problems with equal access to education, is reducing how long people spend in education before achieving certification and qualification. If undergrad was taken down to 2 years, you can have double the courses running, meaning twice the amount of places available over a 4 year period. With the technological advancements at our disposal, why should we not discuss how certain parts of education can be streamlined and delivered more quickly?

More specifically, the tires are already worn asymmetrically on one side. A simple alignment won’t remove the laterally biased wear. They’ll still be more worn more on one side even after the alignment gets done. To rebalance the wear on the tire, you need to overcorrect for a while and intentionally over-wear the other side for a bit... all with the knowledge that this overcorrection is only temporary until the wear is again balanced across the entire tire.

Theory of the Speed of Light By Francisco Gómez Paulet For many years, there has been a mystery in physics which has not yet been solved. The speed of light never varies, we always get the same result. For example, if a light-emitting spotlight is moving towards a device which measures the speed of light at a rate of 1000 km/s, the logical conclusion would be to think that the result would be the speed of light plus the speed of the spotlight, or 301,000 km/s, but this is not the case. The result remains the same with no change seen: 300,000 km/s. The explanation for this phenomenon is very simple. Movement as we know it does not actually exist in the universe. Matter is always fixed. When we believe that an object is in motion, what is actually happening is that the object disappears and reappears in another position at such a high frequency that we are not aware of it. This works much like the frames of a film, where still images create the sensation of moving pictures, only in three dimensions. That is why the photons always leave the emitter at the same speed, even though the emitter is in motion. It is actually in a fixed position at the time the photon is emitted. Matter, like light, travels through dark matter, only at a variable speed between 0 to 300,000 km/s depending on its linear momentum, that is, on the matter's capacity for linear reappearance. Matter vibrates between two three-dimensional planes, when disappears from this in which we are appears on the other plane and so on, the universe has 3 dimensions on this plane and 3 others on the other, along with the time dimension makes a total of 7 dimensions. 02/12/2020 goodbye

If I explained it, it would diverge the OP and be considered off topic... I just wanted to make note of it becuase people tend to forget including myself all the time.. y = x^2 or 2x "algeabraically" forgets to tell us, "By the way when you see x its implied that x has a base of 1..x^1 The base could be 10, 2, 3, 12 etc

You have implicitly decided. It seems like many "progressives" have decided that morphological differences related to skin color and skull structure, i.e. the outward physical indicators of race, supersede all other others when ensuring equal opportunity. Your focus on outward morphological differences is wrong headed. The morphological differences which are responsible for differences in achievement are most likely found within the neurological system. If those differences are passed down in conjunction with and therefore correlated with outward morphological differences then the problem is not with the outward differences, but with the neurological system.