Paul A. Tanner III posted Nov 13, 2012 3:29 AM (GSC's remarks follow): > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:52 PM, > firstname.lastname@example.org > <email@example.com> wrote: > > "When comparing set of numbers in sequence, the > median can go down while the largest numbers (and > even all the numbers greater than the median) can go > up and that their rate of increase has no effect on > the median." > > > > Sure, Paul, but by only a FEW percent, NEVER by > FIVE FOLD as you're now >claiming. > > No. You are wrong. In your continuing quest to try to > prove the white > supremacy to which you hold, you continue to show > complete ignorance > of so much and repeatedly refuse to be corrected on > so much. > > When the set of numbers is odd, the median and all > the numbers less > than the median can go down, and that determines the > new median - all > the numbers greater than the median of this set can > go up by any > amount and the median of the new set will not change > at all. When the > set of numbers is even, the number immediately > greater than the > median, the median, and all the numbers less than the > median can go > down, and that determines the new median - all the > numbers greater > than the number immediately greater than the median > of this set can go > up by any amount and the median of the new set will > not change at all. > > You really need to learn some things that until now > you refuse to > learn. Go to the Google search engine and enter > "median". > > > Our REAL GDP is less than $3 trillion, > > No, it is not. Here your ignorance that you seem to > be incapable of > correcting is in how GDP is calculated. You keep > thinking wrongly - > never mind how many times I tell you otherwise - that > GDP involves > only household income. It does not involve only > household income. > > I repeat what I said to you in > > http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=7919501 > > in this thread. > I observe that firstname.lastname@example.org is as ignorant about what his beloved "IQ" is (or measures) as he is about statistical issues.
Also that he had claimed, at one point of his execrable website ("The Father's Manifesto" - http://fathersmanifesto.net/), that Barack Obama possesses an IQ in the mid-seventies. [By the way, I STRONGLY recommend that everyone should study this website carefully as an instance of the smelly nonsense that believers in 'IQ' and other such foolishness can emit].
Also that he has not yet, despite many requests from the undersigned, enlightened us as to what his own "IQ" might be in comparison to Mr Obama's - though he seems to base all his thinking on the supposed superiority of the 'IQ' of the 'white race'.