's Avatar

@joelwatsonfish.bsky.social

12 Followers  |  33 Following  |  11 Posts  |  Joined: 21.01.2025
Posts Following

Posts by (@joelwatsonfish.bsky.social)

Preview
Providence Police release additional video, photos of person of interest in Brown University shooting | ABC6 PROVIDENCE, R.I. (WLNE) — Providence police have released a second video of a person of interest connected to the Brown University shooting, according to the department. In the newly-released video, a...

Providence police are releasing more video of a person of interest in the Brown shooting.

www.abc6.com/providence-p...

They are requesting the public's assistance in identifying this person. Please share these video clips and direct all tips to 401-272-3121 or tips.fbi.gov/digitalmedia...

16.12.2025 00:05 — 👍 5    🔁 4    💬 0    📌 0

This is all due to an admissions scandal, which was largely hidden and which faculty were largely against.

14.11.2025 12:14 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0
NOT-OD-24-110: Notice of Legislative Mandates in Effect for FY 2024 NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: Notice of Legislative Mandates in Effect for FY 2024 NOT-OD-24-110. NIH

On changes to #NIH indirect rates, there is a law in place that prohibits NIH from making such changes without the approval of Congress. See Division D, Title II Section 224 of The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (Public Law No: 118-47) grants.nih.gov/grants/guide...

08.02.2025 00:56 — 👍 3607    🔁 1472    💬 78    📌 239

Universities being affirmatively political (and on the left) has invited retribution.

The suddenness and ferocity of this cut is as foolish as it is devastating.

08.02.2025 01:05 — 👍 9    🔁 2    💬 3    📌 1

Direct attack on university scientific research.

08.02.2025 01:00 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

Are p-values the real problem, or is it more about not valuing things like preregistered replication studies? As an outsider, I just have this feeling that far more value is placed on new tentative findings than on really confirming that something new has truly been found.

01.02.2025 21:12 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0

It looks to me like they are considering for more than just gender there. Wouldn't the correct conclusion be to hire fewer male pilots over 60 years of age with more experience?

01.02.2025 20:50 — 👍 1    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

I mean... here's a quote from their conclusion: "The findings suggest that male and female GA pilots are not different with respect to the likelihood of an accident being caused by pilot error. " Should I not believe the authors here?

01.02.2025 20:46 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0

So what do the authors mean when they say "there is no evidence... that support the likelihood of an accident caused by pilot error to be related to pilot gender"? It seems like if there were evidence, they would point that out.

01.02.2025 20:45 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0

Do you not know?

01.02.2025 20:42 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0

That's the data for all pilots (not just those with many flights or older)?

01.02.2025 20:41 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0

You are saying you see something in the data that statistical tests aren't detecting?

01.02.2025 20:32 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0

I mean, did you read the text of what you posted? It literally says "there is no evidence from the Chi-square tests and logistic regression that support the likelihood of an accident caused by pilot error to be related to pilot gender".

01.02.2025 20:22 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0

Gender doesn't seem related to accidents caused by pilot error, so the solution to not enough pilots is just recruiting more pilots (who meet qualifications) regardless of gender.

01.02.2025 12:46 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0