Bkk Brian

Just because someone has been to school, that doesn't mean school is their only, or even, their chief source of information. Deflection, nobody claimed it did and again you are speculating without even knowing the rest of the questions or reading the report study. Like I said at the beginning come back to me when you have the evidence, ie the questions. Not your opinions.

"Thinking about the school you attended..." that's not part of a leading question? Explicitly directing attention to a possible source does not make a question leading? Your defense of these questions is laughable. They are assuming they've been to school, yes correct......lol "1,505 18- to 20-year-old Americans—a demographic that has yet to graduate from, or only recently graduated from, high school." You don't have the questions, the article gives a very small snapshot of the actual report "Manhattan Institute report of all the findings from this study will be published in the coming months; what follows is a preview of some of them. Our analysis here focuses mainly on the results for the sample overall rather than for various subgroups."

What I still understand is that you do not have a list of the questions asked yet you claim they were leading questions. I also understand the few questions that have been published are not leading questions and explanations are also there for a few. In addition I also know the authors are not saying they are leading questions. “Thinking about the school you attended, were you ever taught any of the following concepts in class or did you hear them from adults in the school you attended?” Those who didn’t report being taught any of the five CRT-related concepts serve as the reference group for tests of statistical significance. The “Have not been taught” group serves as the reference category for tests of statistical significance. Although I now see you have reverted to whether its peer reviewed or not.....lol. Since when do surveys/studies of these types get peer reviewed? Can you show me some examples? Its not published in a scientific journal.....lol

So no link to the bizarre claim then

Making things up again.

The rules of the forum, its to stop people making things up and claiming them as true

Of course it matters, this is not a leading question, they are not claiming they are either, only you. "Specifically, we asked those who reported being taught at least one of the listed concepts in a high school class what, if anything, they were taught about arguments opposing them."

No a link to an explanation as to why. Quite different to an ad hominem attack

Why are you speaking for Bob? If they are true put a credible link to the claims. Its that simple

The words from the article do not claim the study uses leading questions either.....................

You have not seen a list of the questions, you have no evidence....lol.

No thanks, you are making the claim not me and there is nothing in their description that claims they are using leading questions. Just you.

You can point out all you want, but you do not have evidence of the questions list that you claim are leading questions and as you can read I have already quoted one which is not leading.

I will carry on to, I posted an article that mentions a study (among other examples that it links to), you are claiming it uses leading questions for that study but you don't have a list of all the questions.

Yes you keep posting the same thing and still have no list of the actual questions. I also gave an example of one of the questions but I wont repeat it.....lol

Yet you still don't have a list of the questions and claiming they are pointless and disregarding the study when you've not read it...lol

I have no need for a list, I am not making any claims on the questions being leading because I have not seen them, the one I did read and post is not leading.

Tell you what, you made a claim on them being leading questions but you don't have a list of those questions to make a judgement, the one question I pointed out to you is NOT a leading question. When you get the list of all the questions from the Manhattan Institute which did the study get back to me.

You have been spreading misinformation and now you even go to the lengths of mentioning that pedo Ritter.

Do you have a list of all the questions? Here's one: Specifically, we asked those who reported being taught at least one of the listed concepts in a high school class what, if anything, they were taught about arguments opposing them. Yes I understand what a leading question is and the above is not one of those.

Says you, do you have anything apart from your opinion, like a link to disprove this study? Did you notice all the other elements and questions after your first sentence you quoted? After they had begun what did they do? "For instance, 93 percent of respondents reported either being taught (85 percent) or hearing from an adult at school about at least one of the eight listed concepts, with an average of 4.3 concepts; 90 percent reported either being taught (80 percent) or hearing about at least one of the five CRT-related concepts, with an average of 3.0 concepts; and 74 percent reported either being taught (54 percent) or hearing about at least one of the three gender-related concepts, with an average of 1.3 concepts. While these figures are for the sample overall, they do not meaningfully differ by school type. Levels of exposure were similar regardless of whether respondents reported attending public or private high schools."

Russian apologists have been touting economist Sachs for 2 years. He's been done to death on these topics Putin’s American Cheerleaders https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-russia-war-ukraine-solovyov-jeffrey-sachs-columbia-university-mark-episkopos-center-national-interest-dimitri-simes-11673017425 https://archive.ph/WRODG

And? You said you were here to give a balance, I posted just one of your false claims that is anything but balanced which you have deflected with this. Of course Zelensky wants a deal, there was a very large meeting in Switzerland about a peace deal, they signed a document on that.....lol

There are a few of us trying to give a more balanced view Nonsense, just one of your posts which is completely false, I wont mention the Dombas figures either that you brought up Russia has been very restrained so far and plods along to avoid casualties - Ukraine at 500,000, Russia at 150,000, I think. Watch this space.

Did you note the other 5 topics on numbers even from AFP? You came on here making a wild claim, you have still not provided a link to that, where is it?