Nature officially endorsed Kamala Harris for President and thus fully established their righteous bona fides. Here’s a recent tweet from the same folks:
They’re highlighting the inferior achievement/ability of a subset of humans. When did that become okay?
I can’t see the original article, but I assume that they’re able to conclude that “the school environment triggers” the gender gap because they’re comparing this to kids who aren’t in school? How are they testing all those truants and home schooled kids?
The nature over nurture movement 15 years ago opened the floodgates of the gender gap. Men don’t bother anymore if they don’t want to be breadwinners.
What does it say about academia that girls are now getting more college degrees than boys? Are they getting more education because they need more training in math to be competitive? Is it remedial?
Isn’t it known that women have better average than men in IQ (Math?), but there are always more men in the bottom and top 2%?
Couldn’t access the article, but the third chart looks unusually smooth, did they apply some filters or something!
Could it be because the questions are too easy at the start of school and didn’t need much training but the difficulty increased as they went through the coursework? So, the numbers were measuring how the genders do before any math training, and how they do after going through 6 months and 1 year of training, where the tests included what was taught till those points in time? If it is indeed so, the first chart would measure the natural aptitude towards Math and the other two would measure how much the genders are *motivated* to study Math, right?