If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   The Kennedy dynasty: famous for their prior roles as President, ambassadors, senators and dignitaries of various high offices; now gaining notoriety as anti-science, anti-vaxxer nutcases extraordinaire. Wait, what?   (slate.com) divider line 69
    More: Fail, cranks, ambassadors  
•       •       •

1735 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 Jun 2013 at 8:06 AM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



69 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-06 09:49:49 AM

Skirl Hutsenreiter: Regression to the mean is frequently used this way and it bothers me.

If people picked mates randomly, picked child-rearing strategies randomly, and were assigned socio-economic status randomly, then, yes, all families would over several generations approach the mean. But they don't.


No. "Superior" families don't retain superiority because of superior heredity. When examined by class, they all regress to the mean of the class and blood-lines make no difference.

That is the whole rational for Conservative policies to maintain class privileges, because without them their offspring would be just average and have to compete with the lower classes.
 
2013-06-06 09:51:34 AM

Skirl Hutsenreiter: nocturnal001: MugzyBrown: hardinparamedic: This deeply saddens me.

It was John Kennedy that put us on a crash course with the Moon, and kickstarted space science as more than just an odd little sideshow in the US.

How far the family has fallen.

He also put us on a crash course with vietnam.

He also almost caused us to get into a nuclear war with the Soviets.  Thank God Kruschev had a cooler head.

I can't remember who came up with the idea, but invariably a family will revert to the mean average over time. A few generations of exceptional people will tend to be balanced out by a few generations of tards.

Regression to the mean is frequently used this way and it bothers me.

It's fundamentally about how, if you're measuring something with random fluctuations and get a high value, you'll soon get a balancing low value, so that the average of your measurements starts to approach the true mean.

If people picked mates randomly, picked child-rearing strategies randomly, and were assigned socio-economic status randomly, then, yes, all families would over several generations approach the mean. But they don't.


Perhaps "approaching the mean" is a better use of the term.  Your points are valid, but you are also not taking into account stagnation in elite circles. Members of these groups do not go out into the world and pick the best and brightest to mate with, instead choosing others in their circles. Kennedy man/woman X could definitely find a superior specimen among the normal population or even among "new money", but that isn't how it goes down. Genes stagnate, ideas stagnate, innovation and drive stagnates.  Look at history, how many of our best and brightest came out of the elite compared to how many were self made?

Growing up in to much privilege ruins people.
 
2013-06-06 10:04:47 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: There's a reason the Green Beret headquarters is called the JFK Special Warfare Center and School.


Because JFK wanted the Green Berets to train insurgents and guerrillas to be able to combat what the Soviets were doing at the time, and he championed the development of commando units for irregular operations?

Please, PLEASE, don't pretend this was strictly a US Thing. Vietnam was as much the Soviets as it was the United States.
 
2013-06-06 10:10:05 AM
I guess even the Kennedy family isn't safe from the results of incest.
 
2013-06-06 11:13:46 AM
Yes well intelligence is a trait of the mother and when you fark and have children with stupid pretty women you have to expect that your children will be dumb as a box of rocks. It is why patriarchs of wealthy families have idiots sons.
 
2013-06-06 11:24:18 AM

HairBolus: Skirl Hutsenreiter: Regression to the mean is frequently used this way and it bothers me.

If people picked mates randomly, picked child-rearing strategies randomly, and were assigned socio-economic status randomly, then, yes, all families would over several generations approach the mean. But they don't.

No. "Superior" families don't retain superiority because of superior heredity. When examined by class, they all regress to the mean of the class and blood-lines make no difference.

That is the whole rational for Conservative policies to maintain class privileges, because without them their offspring would be just average and have to compete with the lower classes.


Yes, this would be a good modification of nocturnal's statement.

Regression to the mean is useful for understanding a scenario where you're testing a group, pulling a subset based on those results, then testing that subset again and finding, lo and behold, their test results went down because some of those high scores were a bit of a fluke.  People talk about members of families regressing to the mean as if that mean were all of society*, but that conclusion depends on a failure to think about what group you're starting with. Senators are largely pulled from a small subset of elite American families, and that is the mean to which you expect the members of those families to regress.

As to heredity: the choice of mate is not just about heredity -- we're not animals who give birth and walk away.

*Not to mention the implicit assumption that an accomplishment like being elected President is somehow comparable to a single test result, but nevermind.
 
2013-06-06 11:31:59 AM
Actually, they were a family of bootleggers who bought their way into those roles. Now they're just on cruise control.
 
2013-06-06 01:29:27 PM
i.imgur.com

What the hell is wrong with that man's face?
 
2013-06-06 02:00:20 PM
The natural result of American liberalism proudly on display.
 
2013-06-06 02:23:39 PM

blahpers: [i.imgur.com image 250x363]

What the hell is wrong with that man's face?


If the 10-years-younger version of Kevin Costner had been in a horrific car accident and suffered severe facial injuries requiring intense reconstructive surgery, he'd look exactly like that.

Something's wrong with that left eye.  It's...it's gone spooky.
 
2013-06-06 03:13:47 PM

another cultural observer: blahpers: [i.imgur.com image 250x363]

What the hell is wrong with that man's face?

If the 10-years-younger version of Kevin Costner had been in a horrific car accident and suffered severe facial injuries requiring intense reconstructive surgery, he'd look exactly like that.

Something's wrong with that left eye.  It's...it's gone spooky.


The left eye is looking at you. The right... somewhere else.
 
2013-06-06 03:53:06 PM
Too much drunken in-breeding has watered down their gene-pool.
 
2013-06-06 05:03:54 PM

blahpers: [i.imgur.com image 250x363]

What the hell is wrong with that man's face?


Too much inbreeding in America's royal families these days.
 
2013-06-06 05:15:12 PM

blahpers: [i.imgur.com image 250x363]

What the hell is wrong with that man's face?


[fetalalcoholsyndrome.jpg]
 
2013-06-06 07:11:01 PM

nocturnal001: MugzyBrown: hardinparamedic: This deeply saddens me.

It was John Kennedy that put us on a crash course with the Moon, and kickstarted space science as more than just an odd little sideshow in the US.

How far the family has fallen.

He also put us on a crash course with vietnam.

He also almost caused us to get into a nuclear war with the Soviets.  Thank God Kruschev had a cooler head.


Eh, the missile crisis was a confluence of many misjudgments on both sides.  If you credit Khrushchev for backing down, you have to also blame him for putting the missiles in Cuba in the first place (and for doing so secretly).
 
2013-06-06 07:37:44 PM

Snatch Bandergrip: nocturnal001: MugzyBrown: hardinparamedic: This deeply saddens me.

It was John Kennedy that put us on a crash course with the Moon, and kickstarted space science as more than just an odd little sideshow in the US.

How far the family has fallen.

He also put us on a crash course with vietnam.

He also almost caused us to get into a nuclear war with the Soviets.  Thank God Kruschev had a cooler head.

Eh, the missile crisis was a confluence of many misjudgments on both sides.  If you credit Khrushchev for backing down, you have to also blame him for putting the missiles in Cuba in the first place (and for doing so secretly).


It is a fascinating story all around. Considering our placements in eastern Europe I can't blame the ruskies all that much.

Still, very glad we won that game of chicken.
 
2013-06-06 07:43:50 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Yes well intelligence is a trait of the mother and when you fark and have children with stupid pretty women you have to expect that your children will be dumb as a box of rocks. It is why patriarchs of wealthy families have idiots sons.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2013-06-06 07:58:47 PM

nocturnal001: It is a fascinating story all around. Considering our placements in eastern Europe I can't blame the ruskies all that much.

Still, very glad we won that game of chicken.


Yeah, with the Jupiters in Turkey, it could be argued that Krush was justified to put missiles in Cuba.  I just disagree with the idea that it was JFK that almost caused doomsday; he and Krush, it seems, were the only ones with any authority that seemed to think that nuclear annihilation was a bad thing.
 
2013-06-06 08:07:34 PM

nocturnal001: Snatch Bandergrip: nocturnal001: MugzyBrown: hardinparamedic: This deeply saddens me.

It was John Kennedy that put us on a crash course with the Moon, and kickstarted space science as more than just an odd little sideshow in the US.

How far the family has fallen.

He also put us on a crash course with vietnam.

He also almost caused us to get into a nuclear war with the Soviets.  Thank God Kruschev had a cooler head.

Eh, the missile crisis was a confluence of many misjudgments on both sides.  If you credit Khrushchev for backing down, you have to also blame him for putting the missiles in Cuba in the first place (and for doing so secretly).

It is a fascinating story all around. Considering our placements in eastern Europe I can't blame the ruskies all that much.

Still, very glad we won that game of chicken.


This. We had missiles in Turkey pointed at Russia. You cannot blame Russia for then moving some missiles to Cuba pointed at us.
 
Displayed 19 of 69 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report