Crémieux Profile picture
Jan 15 18 tweets 6 min read Read on X
This post got 50,000 likes and it never even pointed out the actual issue with the calculations, it just took issue with framing and it expressed that Kareem is too inept to find sources.

But what's new?

Kareem debunking thread below Image
Kareem says this is a "textbook example of how to lie with statistics."

It really isn't, but let's see what he bases this on.

The first thing he says -- his "main criticism" -- is that the data isn't provided. But for Kareem, this is completely meaningless. Image
We know this is meaningless, because even when all the data is presented, Kareem still doesn't do anything with it, understand it, open it, manipulate it, or anything.

He says "where's the data?" and when he gets it, he just blocks you.

Example:
Kareem doesn't even deal in simulating data to check if his EXTREMELY BAD statistical intuitions are correct.

Remember this? If he had simulated it, he would've seen that the exact opposite of his claim was true!

Image
But in any case, here's the data for the present post:

This should've taken Kareem about five seconds to find, so there goes his "main criticism".national-conservative.com/interracial-ho…
Kareem's next criticism is that the post leaves "out relevant information like how many murders happen between people of the same race."

But this is *irrelevant* information when the topic is interracial homicides.

It's only relevant if you're changing the topic! Image
He says that the post "makes it seem as if race is the main causal factor in murders", but that's only true if you have a reading comprehension problem.

He then says "if you look at interracial murders in the context of all murders, they are almost always a tiny fraction." Image
This is just not true!

Something like a fifth of murders cannot be called a "tiny fraction" given the population sizes and segregation at play.

Now, in the real world, homicide is increasingly interracial, and the Black-on-White number is large:

But Kareem's claim also isn't *relevant.*

Just because you want to talk about all murders instead of interracial murders doesn't mean that people are dishonest for talking about something different than what you wish they were focusing on.

This is a common ploy he does.
His claim that @GadSaad's post assumes Blacks and Whites are equally likely to murder except for race is asinine.

No one said that!

There can be tons of differentiating factors at play, but the statistics remain, and the risk to Whites from Blacks remains higher than vice-versa Image
Kareem then makes the baseless claim that calling an interracial homicide an interracial homicide is an "essentially racist framing". This makes no sense, but, who cares?

His claim that focusing on interracial murders is to condone intraracial murders is also not supportable. Image
Two things should be obvious.

Kareem deals in non-sequiturs

Kareem doesn't have any real criticisms, he just doesn't like what @GadSaad is saying, and he wants to claim that looking at stats he doesn't approve of can't be neutral when what he's replying to shows it can be.Image
Now Kareem isn't smart, he's a fraud, he's been caught lying, implying untruths, and more.

But what's funniest here is that there is a real statistical error and he missed it.

The image @GadSaad posted says Blacks are 23x as likely to kill Whites as vice-versa, but it's wrong!
You get to the 23x (really 23.1x) number by multiplying the ratios of Whites killed by Blacks to Blacks kill by Whites by the population percentage ratio, when that's not required.

For population pairs, you just use the ratio of killed to killed.

That number is 458/84 = 5.45x.
There's also a data issue that Kareem didn't notice:

These numbers are very unlikely to be true!

Open up EZASHR, which spans 1980 to 2020, and the yearly White-on-Black numbers are usually 400-500, and the Black-on-White numbers are usually 1,300-1,500.

Alarm bells.
This dataset starts in 2024, so we can't use overlapping years with EZASHR to see if it's correct in other years, but if we could, my bet is that they wouldn't line up.

Homicide statistics don't tend to jump around enough to get to the source's numbers.
As a final point of order, the Black-on-White number at the source is 472, not 458, and the White-on-Black number is 86, not 84. This is minor and probably just means Gad's image was a bit out of date. Not a big deal at all.
My advice to Kareem is to focus less on making threads that illustrate he suffers from cognitive difficulties and to instead focus on earning his PhD that he's spent nearly 9 years on so far.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Crémieux

Crémieux Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @cremieuxrecueil

Jan 16
I used to like this chart, but now I think it's too misleading and we should leave it behind in 2024.

🧵 Image
The key issue is how household size is adjusted for.

In the OP image, they divide by the square root of household size. This is problematic because it means Gen Z incomes are being inflated to the extent they live with their parents.
Generally, when I hear that the younger generations are more successful, what I think is that they're more successful in the stereotypical ways:

They've got relatively better jobs, relatively bigger homes, relatively faster cars and all that.

But the OP graph isn't that.
Read 8 tweets
Jan 16
I was reminded of this yesterday when looking into national IQ estimates.

The "pseudo-analysis" style of critique is to just spit out tons of possible problems, to nitpick, and then to assume that means a whole enterprise is rotten without even checking if the critique holds.Image
The people who engage in this style of critique (example below) don't care for scientific reasoning about these topics.

They want purity by their arbitrary and inconsistent standards, not correctness, not a 'best effort' to get make progress on finding answers. Image
So they misrepresent what people do and say; they attack strawmen; they claim people are wrong based on reasons that don't affect actually make them wrong, but they never check; they fail to understand the basics of the things they're contesting, but they act confident; etc.
Read 5 tweets
Jan 14
'The patient always lies.'

A major problem with the healthcare system is that patients lie to their doctor.

Most patients will even privately admit that they lied when they were informing their doctors about their issues. Their reasons for doing this often aren't very good: Image
Patients want to avoid getting lectured, they don't want their doctor to call them fat or tell them their snacking habits are unhealthy. They're afraid the doctor will judge them or think they're stupid or immoral, and they don't want the doctor to tell their family.
But because people want to preserve their privacy even in the private setting of a doctor's office, they end up making doctors' jobs harder.

They make it harder to diagnose conditions and to prescribe the right drugs.
Read 5 tweets
Jan 11
Napoleon was the best-performing general in European history, and it's not even close.

His Wins Above Replacement (WAR) simply dwarfed everyone else, including Caesar. Image
You know who underperformed?

Robert E. Lee!

Gray reputation, poor realized performance. He faced a lot of disadvantages, but it's clear he also made a lot of bad choices, like ordering Picketts' Charge.
Read 4 tweets
Jan 6
The Home Office rape gang report cited several studies that reported the ethnicities of rape gang members and it concluded that there wasn't reliable evidence of Asian overrepresentation.

But every study providing data showed there definitely was🧵 Image
If you throw in the numbers from Cockbain's (2018) study, the overrepresentation is on the order of hundreds of times.

If Asians are 6.1% (8.6%) vs Whites being 87.6% (83.1%) of the general population, that report has them at 380.56x (256.06x) overrepresented.
There's no ambiguity.

Large percentages of all the known rape gangs' perpetrators are known, the sample sizes are in the thousands, etc.

And yet, the Home Office is desperate to claim that this overrepresentation is "unreliable".

There's a sense in which it is.
Read 12 tweets
Jan 6
Have you noticed that people seem younger at the same ages? 40 is the new 30, 30 is the new 25, and so on?

There's something to it. People nowadays are aging more gracefully, and what makes this more interesting is that it's a global phenomenon.

Let's talk five "capacities"🧵 Image
Psychological capacity is indexed by self-reports: How do you feel, how are you sleeping, etc.

Locomotor capacity is indexed by measured walking speeds, the classic chair stand test, etc.

Vitality capacity is indexed by grip strength, forced expiratory volumes, and hemoglobin A
In a large British longitudinal study of people born from the 1920s through the 1950s and measured again at various ages, what we see in terms of these measures is that people are clocking in higher, and they're aging more gracefully. Image
Read 17 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(