ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 2020 elections , Elizabeth Warren , Massachusetts politics , presidential candidates , racial categorization , racial isssues

Reply
Old 20th October 2018, 01:55 PM   #2001
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 10,402
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Your use of "Fauxcahontas" is neither clever nor witty. It's childish and foolish. But of course, if you prefer to present yourself as such, carry on.
He can't help himself... he's like a lost puppy, just has to follow along behind Dear Leader...
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920

Last edited by smartcooky; 20th October 2018 at 01:59 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 02:01 PM   #2002
Tero
Graduate Poster
 
Tero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North American prairie
Posts: 1,373
So if great great grandpa Peteron came from Sweden in 1850 and I have his last name and 2% Swedish DNA, I can be Swedish. Swedes won't send some heritage committee to interrogate me. But if I have an unnamed native American in my tree leaving the same 2%, I cannot claim Native heritage. Not tribal membership. Got it.
Tero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 02:05 PM   #2003
crescent
Master Poster
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,896
Originally Posted by Slings and Arrows View Post
According to Aunt Bea, Pappaw had high cheekbones:
"I still have a picture on my mantel at home, and it's a picture my mother had before that, a picture of my grandfather. And my Aunt Bea has walked by that picture at least a 1,000 times, remarked that he —her father, my Pappaw— had high cheekbones like all of the Indians do."
In which someone who is not Warren says that someone else, who is also not Warren, looks like an Indian. What does this prove??
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 02:32 PM   #2004
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,095
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
...disregarding Native Americans rights?

Given your racist arguments, the answer is clearly no.

https://medium.com/@jmarkinman/eliza...t-337a3770ce77 ... ?
Is there some science in that opinion piece? Oh, this is from the article, aka opinion piece by a republican, you said I did not read - it appears to only be a cherry picked quote mined headline the claim of racism.

Your source, your opinion piece for your claim of racism, he believes in conspiracy theories, and is far right. You have a far right opinion article driving the claim of racism.

Does not change the DNA.

The best part of the opinion piece by a far right Uranium one CTer is this -
Quote:
Personally, I don’t think we should call her Pocahontas. I believe it fetishizes Native American culture, and it does so in a negative, undeserving tone. - Mark Inman, Ph.D. said so
Oh, I did not read it? lol, failed mind reader

silly meme for silly opinion piece.

There is a new rock discovered https://i.imgflip.com/2hdtwg.jpg

Quote:
Goofy Elizabeth Warren, sometimes referred to as Pocahontas, pretended to be a Native American in order to advance her career. Very racist! = trump tweet
Over 15 times in tweets, liar in chief, calls her Pocahontas. First in lies, first in name calling, first in insults. Pay up liar in chief.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 02:33 PM   #2005
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,098
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
On second thought, he did score a bull's eye with the his base. It doesn't take much. Lead them in a "lock her up" chant, insult women, claim there are "some fine people" among white supremacists, bully people, and throw around some childish, insulting names and they're as happy as pigs in mud.
What he spouts isn't mud.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 02:41 PM   #2006
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,073
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Is there some science in that opinion piece? Oh, this is from the article, aka opinion piece by a republican, you said I did not read - it appears to only be a cherry picked quote mined headline the claim of racism.

Your source, your opinion piece for your claim of racism, he believes in conspiracy theories, and is far right. You have a far right opinion article driving the claim of racism.

Does not change the DNA.

The best part of the opinion piece by a far right Uranium one CTer is this - Oh, I did not read it? lol, failed mind reader

silly meme for silly opinion piece.

There is a new rock discovered https://i.imgflip.com/2hdtwg.jpg



Over 15 times in tweets, liar in chief, calls her Pocahontas. First in lies, first in name calling, first in insults. Pay up liar in chief.
Say, the white guy's opinion matters more than say Kim Tall Bear's opinion (linked earlier).

Hilarious that one does not understand that scientific data can be misused.

Warren Truthers, gotta love it!
__________________
I'm your obsession
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:02 PM   #2007
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 14,924
Originally Posted by Tero View Post
So if great great grandpa Peteron came from Sweden in 1850 and I have his last name and 2% Swedish DNA, I can be Swedish. Swedes won't send some heritage committee to interrogate me. But if I have an unnamed native American in my tree leaving the same 2% less than 1%, I cannot claim Native heritage. Not tribal membership. Got it.
FIFY
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:08 PM   #2008
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,562
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
(Sorry to bounce back so far - fast thread)

I think a better musical example would be a kid hearing someone playing the sax part from 'Baker Street' and saying "They aren't as good as Bob Holness".

Wareyin's point, if I understand it correctly, is not that you can't form your own opinion , but rather that if your opinion is about an incorrect piece of data that the source of that incorrect data can be traced as it's unlikely to have arisen independently multiple times.
Thank you, you got it.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:15 PM   #2009
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,095
science being misused by trump's minions

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Say, the white guy's opinion matters more than say Kim Tall Bear's opinion (linked earlier).

Hilarious that one does not understand that scientific data can be misused.

Warren Truthers, gotta love it!
DNA wins, trump lost again, and his followers quibble about science. You posted a white guy's opinion.

Yes, Science can be denied, but that is failure. Yes, are you misusing science data? Is the cult of trump anti-science, or just trump?

Does this mean trump is not going to pay up on his word?

https://i.imgflip.com/2hdtwg.jpg

That guy, the stable genius, mr hi IQ, the liar in chief, will not make good on his word. Not news.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:32 PM   #2010
Tero
Graduate Poster
 
Tero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North American prairie
Posts: 1,373
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
FIFY
1.5%. But since natives do not allow numbers, probably less than 25% using just family tree would fail anyone.

Last edited by Tero; 20th October 2018 at 03:34 PM.
Tero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:40 PM   #2011
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,730
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
What he spouts isn't mud.
I stand corrected.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:40 PM   #2012
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,073
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
DNA wins, trump lost again, and his followers quibble about science. You posted a white guy's opinion.

Yes, Science can be denied, but that is failure. Yes, are you misusing science data? Is the cult of trump anti-science, or just trump?

Does this mean trump is not going to pay up on his word?

https://i.imgflip.com/2hdtwg.jpg

That guy, the stable genius, mr hi IQ, the liar in chief, will not make good on his word. Not news.
Oh dear, Beachnut did not read the thread. No surprise

https://twitter.com/KimTallBear/stat...17467021651969
https://www.cherokee.org/News/Storie...rrens-DNA-test

Warren's Truthers do not understand the difference between science and misusing scientific data.
__________________
I'm your obsession
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:50 PM   #2013
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 14,924
Originally Posted by Tero View Post
1.5%. But since natives do not allow numbers, probably less than 25% using just family tree would fail anyone.
'Up to 1.56%' maximum starting from '01%', with the genetic expert Bustamente, scouring every possible SNP and allele for the slightest trace.

At least 2% backs up your known and named Swedish ancestor.

Your parents being 50%, grandparents 25%, great-grandparents 12.5%, g-g g/parents 6% and g-g-g grandparents 3% or so.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb

Last edited by Vixen; 20th October 2018 at 03:52 PM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:53 PM   #2014
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,902
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Oh dear, Beachnut did not read the thread. No surprise

https://twitter.com/KimTallBear/stat...17467021651969
https://www.cherokee.org/News/Storie...rrens-DNA-test

Warren's Truthers do not understand the difference between science and misusing scientific data.
So when is DONNY GRAPE JUICE going to pay up?
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:54 PM   #2015
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 16,049
Okay someone explain the "DONNY GRAPE JUICE" thing to me.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:55 PM   #2016
WilliamSeger
Illuminator
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,226
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Okay someone explain the "DONNY GRAPE JUICE" thing to me.
He "welched" on the bet.
__________________
"We're done! We're done! GET OUT!"
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:55 PM   #2017
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,025
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
'Up to 1.56%' maximum starting from '01%', with the genetic expert Bustamente, scouring every possible SNP and allele for the slightest trace.

At least 2% backs up your known and named Swedish ancestor.

Your parents being 50%, grandparents 25%, great-grandparents 12.5%, g-g g/parents 6% and g-g-g grandparents 3% or so.
I'll just leave this thread here

Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It simply doesn't work that way. For example, I am related to every single member of the Swedish nobility of C16. All of them seemed to have had concubines.
True and not surprising
Quote:
Take King John III of Sweden (who of course, is a distant cousin). He had a concubine called Karin Hansdottir, with whom he had three illegitimate children who survived infancy. He was unable to marry her, as she was not of the nobility. His brother, Erik XIV likewise had three illegitimate daughters with Agda Persdottir (a commoner). Like King Gustav (Erik and John's father) they could only marry other nobles (or lose their own nobility or royalty).
Not surprising - but think through the consequences. How many of these illegitimate children had children and how many of these there are good records for their great grandchildren

Quote:
They also need to have a male heir-apparent. So they paid off their mistresses. Agda got a castle in Kalmar and arranged marriage to one of Erik's courtiers. Karin likewise, was given some grand estates by John (when he dumped her to marry Princess Katarina Jagonellica) and an arranged marriage with first his chamberlain who sadly got executed, and then the castellan of one of his castles.
Not sure where this is going, but still...
Quote:
Rogue King Erik XIV did get his way and married a commoner who became Queen Consort (if only for two months before Erik was deposed) Karina Månsdottir, whose father was a tavern keeper. Erik is a cousin (less so than John III who was a full-blooded Leijonhufvud/Lowenhaupt) despite having a mother from Saxony.
You are starting to confuse documented lineage with actual kinship here
Quote:
I show zero relationship to Karina Månsdottir, although I am related to her children because of Erik, and because she later married a Tott (noble)
And here is where you fall over. On many levels

You are in effect claiming that you and her husband share a common ancestor. That is almost certainly true.

However I *really* doubt that you can trace all your ancestors to the 16th Century - and even if the spouses of the mothers were documented, in that time, there is probably some bastardy.

Quote:


I am a cousin (11th) of Karin Hansdotter, but not at all to the two men she was married to after being pensioned off by John. The second one, Lars Hordeel, was ennobled afer their marriage. He was made a knight (Boije) being a rare case of a commoner given this honour. He became a district judge of an entire region. I am not related to him at all (apart from by marriage). Karin was the illegitimate daughter of a noble woman named Ingeborg Tott (which explains her being a cousin).

I have zilch relationship to Agda Persdottir, but I do to her children with Erik and also her children with her arranged husband, a Swedish nobleman named Fleming.

My relationship to John III and Charles IX (brothers) is stronger than that of Erik's (different mother). This is because King Gustav (Vasa) was a minor noble from a couple of generations prior and married into the powerful Stures and Leijonhufvuds. The stronger relationship comes with John and Charles because the Leijonhufvuds are an ancient noble Swedish family, which of course, I am connected to, and less so to the Saxony bunch (Erik's maternal nobility).

This was C16. Now here is the thing. If I am a cousin or whatever of the aforementioned Swedish nobles and royals and this has happened purely because everybody from that part of the world is related, how come I have zero relationship to the ones who were not nobles (e.g., Karin's first and second husbands) as after all, they go back to C16 and have had plenty of time to mix? I should show cousinship to all of them, not just the nobles and the royals. It cannot be said their family tree is unknown.
The two highlighted parts are wrong.

The first because of the second. You don't know all your ancestors to the 16th Century. If you did, you'd probably have to be even more inbred than the Hasburgs.

Or these

Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
It works if you're related to the father instead.

But Vixen again mixes up not being able to trace your ancestry to a certain individual, and the certainty of not being related.
Also, Charlemagne lived in the 8th century. That's 800 additional years of exponential growth of the number of ancestors.
So not being related to everyone alive in the 16th century doesn't refute the argument about how we're related to everyone from the 8th century.
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
It's amusing, isn't it, to observe someone who doesn't know what they're talking about pronouncing with certitude - based on, it would appear, nothing more than the combination of a (bogus) argument from incredulity and a profound lack of understanding of statistics and genetics
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Nothing after that point is worth reading. You don't understand the principles, have no grasp of maths or statistics, and eschew logical argument. Blather away with your family stories. They just demonstrate your lack of understanding.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:56 PM   #2018
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 14,924
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
He "welched" on the bet.
Er, someone scores 1% in an exam paper, you reckon they passed?
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 03:58 PM   #2019
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,902
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Okay someone explain the "DONNY GRAPE JUICE" thing to me.

Explanation here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5#post12468225

The inspiration:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post12467002

Last edited by Elagabalus; 20th October 2018 at 04:02 PM.
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:00 PM   #2020
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 16,049
Yeah great it's really clever can we just go back to using his name? It's no better than Faxauhwhatever.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:02 PM   #2021
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,730
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Er, someone scores 1% in an exam paper, you reckon they passed?
How is that even relevant?
Hint: it's not.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:02 PM   #2022
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,073
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Okay someone explain the "DONNY GRAPE JUICE" thing to me.
It is literally the most insipid mocking name y'all are likely to see.

I suggested that he stop trying to make fetch DGJ happen, but you know kids and their toys...
__________________
I'm your obsession
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:05 PM   #2023
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,902
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Yeah great it's really clever can we just go back to using his name? It's no better than Faxauhwhatever.
But ... they started it.



Also, it uses his actual first name so you can guess who it is. It's not at all like Faxauhwhatever or Barbi Gulag. It's also the reason that Trumpelthinskin™* works so well.


*Thanks, Beachnut!!

Last edited by Elagabalus; 20th October 2018 at 04:10 PM.
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:06 PM   #2024
BrooklynBaby
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 816
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Please quote someone who has said "Warren is an Indian/a Native American". That does not include saying she has NA lineage.

Your use of "Fauxcahontas" is neither clever nor witty. It's childish and foolish. But of course, if you prefer to present yourself as such, carry on.
Well, as you know, Harvard called her a "woman of color" after interviewing and hiring her, which is where this all started. So, do you think they thought she was a race other than a Cherokee Indian? All of this talk about her "heritage" is just a smokescreen to change the subject.

Oh, and what's childish and foolish is all of the Democrats lining up behind her silly DNA "proof" and pretending she didn't pass herself off as a Cherokee to Harvard. That is where we got "Fauxcahontas", and since the shoe fits...

As a bonus, here's a link to a Pow Wow Chow recipe Fauxcahontas copied from a French Chef, and signed one of them "Elizabeth Warren - Cherokee".

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...echniques.html
BrooklynBaby is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:08 PM   #2025
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,025
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Er, someone scores 1% in an exam paper, you reckon they passed?
If someone says that their family history says that they have a great great great grandparent who had Native American ancestry, that would suggest that it wasn't that person's parents, but at closest a single grandparent, possibly earlier.

That is two more greats, which is getting to around seven generations at the latest.

Parent 1
Grand parent 2
great grand parent 3
great great grandparent 4
great great great grandparent 5 (had Native American ancestry, not parent, so add a couple of generations)
great great great great grandparent 6
great great great great great grandparent 7

That is 0.5^7 contribution from a single ancestor, sufficient for the old "single drop" ideology, and consistent with her family history.

0.5^7 comes out at just under 0.8%

Her DNA results are consistent with her claim, which was pretty mild.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:12 PM   #2026
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 14,924
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
I'll just leave this thread here



I am not sure what the relevance is? Please explain.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:15 PM   #2027
BrooklynBaby
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 816
"During her academic career as a law professor, she had her ethnicity changed from white to Native American at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where she taught from 1987 to 1995, and at Harvard University Law School, where she was a tenured faculty member starting in 1995. (She was a visiting professor at Harvard during the 1992-1993 academic year.)"

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/pol...SVO/story.html
BrooklynBaby is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:28 PM   #2028
Ampulla of Vater
Illuminator
 
Ampulla of Vater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 3,045
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post



Warren claimed she had Indian lineage, which the DNA tests show she does. To say she doesn't when the test shows the DNA results are within the range of her family story is like claiming negative TMB tests indicate blood is present.
Does her lineage make her a minority?
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:38 PM   #2029
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 14,924
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
If someone says that their family history says that they have a great great great grandparent who had Native American ancestry, that would suggest that it wasn't that person's parents, but at closest a single grandparent, possibly earlier.

That is two more greats, which is getting to around seven generations at the latest.

Parent 1
Grand parent 2
great grand parent 3
great great grandparent 4
great great great grandparent 5 (had Native American ancestry, not parent, so add a couple of generations)
great great great great grandparent 6
great great great great great grandparent 7

That is 0.5^7 contribution from a single ancestor, sufficient for the old "single drop" ideology, and consistent with her family history.

0.5^7 comes out at just under 0.8%

Her DNA results are consistent with her claim, which was pretty mild.
Single drop ideology? So now she is being discriminated against?

What do you mean, 5th grandparent not of NA parentage? A 'cousin' relationship once or twice removed?
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb

Last edited by Vixen; 20th October 2018 at 04:41 PM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:49 PM   #2030
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,730
This is from the Cherokee rules for tribal membership:


Quote:
Cherokee Nation citizenship law is set by tribal law. There is no minimum blood quantum required for citizenship. Tribal citizenship requires that you have at least one direct ancestor listed on the Dawes Final Rolls, a federal census of those living in the Cherokee Nation that was used to allot Cherokee land to individual citizens in preparation for Oklahoma statehood in 1907.

To be eligible for Cherokee Nation tribal citizenship, you must be able to provide documents that connect you to a direct ancestor listed on one of the Dawes Final Rolls of Citizens of the Cherokee Nation. To be eligible for a federal Certificate Degree of Indian Blood, you must demonstrate through documentation that you descend directly from a person listed on the Dawes’ “by Blood” rolls. This group of census rolls were taken between 1899-1906 of Citizens and Freedmen residing in Indian Territory (now northeastern Oklahoma). If your ancestor did not live in this geographical area during that time period, they will not be listed on the Dawes Rolls.
http://webtest2.cherokee.org/Service...ip/Citizenship

All this quibbling about Warren's percentage of NA blood is not important, according to Cherokee requirements for membership. That she has NA DNA is a fact (unless you're Trump ). The fact that she cannot name an ancestor on the Dawes Roll does not change that. Not all those eligible chose to be counted on the Roll. Social attitudes toward being Indian or part Indian were very different then. My own Creek 4X great grandmother does not appear on the Dawes Roll. It does not change the fact that she and her children were listed as "Indian" in the 1860 Census. In the 1880 Census, she is listed as "white", yet she is referred to as Muskogee (Creek) in several other documents, including a book on the history of Tallassee, AL.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 04:52 PM   #2031
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,098
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Thank you, you got it.
NP. Arguing for or against a misunderstanding or misrepresentation is pretty pointless.

For what it's worth I think your argument is generally true but not universally. I can see people misconstruing Warren's claim independently or due to imprecise wording rather than deliberate misrepresentation. But when the specifics of what she claimed and whether she claimed to be NA during recruitment have been hashed out in such detail I can certainly see why you would argue that a continued refusal to accept them are politically motivated.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 05:06 PM   #2032
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,667
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
All this quibbling about Warren's percentage of NA blood is not important, according to Cherokee requirements for membership. That she has NA DNA is a fact (unless you're Trump ). The fact that she cannot name an ancestor on the Dawes Roll does not change that.
Thank you for making this point, yet again.

At ~5% Native American (Taíno) ancestry, I have between 2x to 5x the amount of native ancestry compared to those in my immediate family (wife & kids) but unlike me, they all have at least one named ancestor on the Dawes Rolls, making them eligible for enrollment in both Delaware and Cherokee tribes.

This cannot be emphasized enough:
Blood quantum and tribal eligibility are two totally separate categories.

Senator Warren did not claim both.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/

Last edited by d4m10n; 20th October 2018 at 05:41 PM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 05:19 PM   #2033
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,730
Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
So, many Democrats aren't saying Fauxcahontas is an Indian, they are just saying she is not, not an Indian? This seems a bit pedantic to me. They're certainly saying something in this interminable thread to defend her claim of being a "woman of color" at Harvard, but one who recently presented a DNA test that proved she wasn't. I mean, this is over, as over as Amanda Knox's case should have been when they found Rudy Guede's DNA all over the crime scene and even inside the body. Yet, on we go.....
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Please quote someone who has said "Warren is an Indian/a Native American". That does not include saying she has NA lineage.

Your use of "Fauxcahontas" is neither clever nor witty. It's childish and foolish. But of course, if you prefer to present yourself as such, carry on.


Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
Well, as you know, Harvard called her a "woman of color" after interviewing and hiring her, which is where this all started. So, do you think they thought she was a race other than a Cherokee Indian? All of this talk about her "heritage" is just a smokescreen to change the subject.

Oh, and what's childish and foolish is all of the Democrats lining up behind her silly DNA "proof" and pretending she didn't pass herself off as a Cherokee to Harvard. That is where we got "Fauxcahontas", and since the shoe fits...

As a bonus, here's a link to a Pow Wow Chow recipe Fauxcahontas copied from a French Chef, and signed one of them "Elizabeth Warren - Cherokee".

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...echniques.html
Your original claim was that Democrats are saying she's Indian. They aren't and no one in this thread...no one...has said she is an Indian. That's why you cannot quote anyone saying she is an Indian. What her detractors ARE saying is that she's NOT an Indian. Well, hell's bells...we aren't saying she is in the first place!

What Harvard chose to call her is on Harvard, not Democrats. Sounds more like Harvard trying to exploit it than Warren herself. All evidence shows that Warren never gained personally or professionally from listing herself as a minority. Was ticking that box a mistake? In hindsight, yes. But mostly because her political opponents made a damn mountain out of a molehill because that's all they have against her and political mudslinging has hit an all time low.

The cookbook is just nonsense "evidence". It was a cookbook for chrissake! She put in a couple recipes as a favor to her cousin, the author, and listed the tribe she believed she had lineage from. The cousin also believed they shared Cherokee lineage. So freaking tar and feather her for believing family stories. String her up! (or maybe you prefer "Lock her up").

Why do you keep insisting the DNA does not support her claim of NA descent? She never said it proves she has CHEROKEE descent as no DNA test can do that (despite Vixen's claims). The DNA test DOES show she has NA DNA in the amount that would be consistent with her claims of a 4X great grandparent. So stop saying the DNA proves she isn't what she says she is. It's like Trump saying Kavanaugh was proved innocent. He wasn't proved innocent or guilty.

ETA: And the use of Fauxcahontas and Pocahontas are still neither clever nor witty...unless you're 8 years old.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 20th October 2018 at 05:37 PM.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 05:30 PM   #2034
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,730
Originally Posted by Ampulla of Vater View Post
Does her lineage make her a minority?
I think ticking that box was foolish. But it doesn't deserve the "OMG! How awful! String her up!" reaction that so many are trying to make it.

There are many tribe members who have very little actual NA DNA, who look completely white, yet mark themselves as minorities. Yet because their 4X or 5X great grandparent was on the Dawes Roll, they can do so with no repercussions. If we compare their NA DNA to Warren's DNA results, there'd be very little difference. Do you think anyone with 1//16 or 1/32 NA ancestry is a true "minority"? Yet they can list themselves as such with no one screaming about it.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 05:36 PM   #2035
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 14,924
Leading on from JimBob's query, I have ancestry leading back to virtually every line of old Swedish nobility. This is because they were only allowed to marry another noble 'with a complete sixteen' noble great-grandparents. The most recent of an officially registered noble as recorded in Adelsvappen being a fifth great grandparent. The spouse was almost certainly noble also, except I haven't been able to trace the parentage.

The list includes: direct g/grandparents, Sparre, (yes, Sigge Sparre who was one of the founders at Arboga of King Gustav's Riksdag), Horn, Natt och Dag, Stiernskjöld, Von Grothusen, Von Tiesenhausen (about ten straight generations of eldest sons of eldest sons in that line), Stålarm, Bitz, Tawast, Kurck, Bielke, Leijonhufvud, Stenbock). Yet despite the multiple Swedish and Baltic German lines, I have NEVER once referred to myself as 'Swedish' and certainly not, 'German'. (Heaven, forfend!)

I am at a loss as to why Warren would in any good faith describe herself as 'Native American' based on a 1% trace, supposedly just one individual six to ten generations ago.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 05:41 PM   #2036
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 14,924
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Your original claim was that Democrats are saying she's Indian. They aren't and no one in this thread...no one...has said she is an Indian. That's why you cannot quote anyone saying she is an Indian. What her detractors ARE saying is that she's NOT an Indian. Well, hell's bells...we aren't saying she is in the first place!

What Harvard chose to call her is on Harvard, not Democrats. Sounds more like Harvard trying to exploit it than Warren herself. All evidence shows that Warren never gained personally or professionally from listing herself as a minority. Was ticking that box a mistake? In hindsight, yes. But mostly because her political opponents made a damn mountain out of a molehill because that's all they have against her and political mudslinging has hit an all time low.

The cookbook is just nonsense "evidence". It was a cookbook for chrissake! She put in a couple recipes as a favor to her cousin, the author, and listed the tribe she believed she had lineage from. The cousin also believed they shared Cherokee lineage. So freaking tar and feather her for believing family stories. String her up! (or maybe you prefer "Lock her up").

Why do you keep insisting the DNA does not support her claim of NA descent? She never said it proves she has CHEROKEE descent as no DNA test can do that (despite Vixen's claims). The DNA test DOES show she has NA DNA in the amount that would be consistent with her claims of a 4X great grandparent. So stop saying the DNA proves she isn't what she says she is. It's like Trump saying Kavanaugh was proved innocent. He wasn't proved innocent or guilty.

ETA: And the use of Fauxcahontas and Pocahontas are still neither clever nor witty...unless you're 8 years old.

No, it would be between 6th and 10th g-g's.

Great sophistry skills!
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 05:57 PM   #2037
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,730
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post

I am at a loss as to why Warren would in any good faith describe herself as 'Native American' based on a 1% trace, supposedly just one individual six to ten generations ago.
NA tribal members with even less NA DNA can list themselves as "minority". Grandchildren of a current 5 generations removed from the Indian ancestor tribal member will be able to still list themselves as a minority.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, it would be between 6th and 10th g-g's.
She said 4X great grandparent which is 6 generations back. The test said:
"of an unadmixed Native American ancestor,” likely 6–10 generations ago."

Great sophistry skills![/quote]

I'd say your sophistry skills are great considering you attempted to change "generations" for "g-g's". Did you think I wouldn't notice?

Last edited by Stacyhs; 20th October 2018 at 05:59 PM.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 06:03 PM   #2038
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,073
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
NA tribal members with even less NA DNA can list themselves as "minority". Grandchildren of a current 5 generations removed from the Indian ancestor tribal member will be able to still list themselves as a minority.



She said 4X great grandparent which is 6 generations back. The test said:
"of an unadmixed Native American ancestor,” likely 6–10 generations ago."

Great sophistry skills!

I'd say your sophistry skills are great considering you attempted to change "generations" for "g-g's". Did you think I wouldn't notice?
Actually she said that there was some unidentifiable Cherokee in her background which her bigoted grandparents were bigoted against.
__________________
I'm your obsession
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 06:03 PM   #2039
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 14,924
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
NA tribal members with even less NA DNA can list themselves as "minority". Grandchildren of a current 5 generations removed from the Indian ancestor tribal member will be able to still list themselves as a minority.



She said 4X great grandparent which is 6 generations back. The test said:
"of an unadmixed Native American ancestor,” likely 6–10 generations ago."



I'd say your sophistry skills are great considering you attempted to change "generations" for "g-g's". Did you think I wouldn't notice?

You are wrong. Careless maths. Fourth generation would be a generous (and significant) 6% NA DNA.

1% would be at least two generations further on, and probably more, if less than that.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2018, 06:16 PM   #2040
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,730
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You are wrong. Careless maths. Fourth generation would be a generous (and significant) 6% NA DNA.

1% would be at least two generations further on, and probably more, if less than that.
Read what the actual DNA test results said:

Quote:
"We find strong evidence that a DNA sample of primarily European descent also contains Native American ancestry from an ancestor in the sample's pedigree 6-10 generations ago."
Please point out to me how 6 generations ago is not a 4X great grandparent.

You are wrong. Careless reading. No one ever said it was a "fourth generation".
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:44 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.