The funny thing about this story is how some self labeled conservatives have reacted to it.
Here's what happened:
A Yale prof did a study in which he expected Tea Partiers to do slightly but noticeably worse in a subject area than some other people. One would not expect him to say so, but we can reasonably assume that he didn't expect the Tea Partiers to do worse than, say, the Al Sharpton demographic.
He ran his numbers and they showed something other than what he expected, ie that Tea Partiers were slightly more scientifically literate. Of course, as always, we need to know the actual questions to convince ourselves, but that's not relevant to this discussion.
He didn't go back and rework the numbers to "norm" and "weight" and magic wand of Phd to make them fit his desired result. He published his result and commented that it surprised him.
Now you would think that the mere right to a good "I told you so." would be in order for those poor maligned defenders of the Tea Party... but for some reason they still want to attack this man and call him names.
I used to work for a man who had an obsessive need to correct others. Once, just to test my observation, I listened to whatever his harangue of the day was, and then repeated it back to him for confirmation. The first word out of his mouth was "No, what I mean is...."
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|