A commitment to the data and science are nothing at all if certain data is not admitted and certain hypotheses cannot be tested because of political considerations. From Tom Woods at lewrockwell.com:
From the Tom Woods Letter:
Well, Dilbert creator Scott Adams has gone and done it now.
He just published the following Twitter thread, which I reproduce here without comment:
Today is the last day of my seven-day challenge to provide a current example of systemic racism in America. No examples yet, just conceptual takes.
One view is that racist people in a non-racist system creates “systemic racism.” For example, the justice system is colorblind by intention, but not by outcome. The reason for different outcomes is assumed to be racism, but studies can’t isolate that variable.
And here we have a new problem. If “look at the data” is an argument for ANYTHING, why are we having mass protests about police killing black citizens at a higher rate than other groups when the data says otherwise?
If you think the data says police are killing black citizens at a higher rate than other groups it is because you are not good at analyzing things. Which puts you in good company with 95% of the public.
STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC 
Reblogged this on uwerolandgross.
LikeLike