Catholic Soldier: Mass Murder Is My Job, But Serving With A Woman Is Too Much For My Conscience

Okay, sheesh.

Here's two obvious issues with time series data. Much of it (though not
all) has to do with "stationarity."

Lets say you have data trending down for a period of years. Over ten years,
you have an average of X1. Then you implement some change, and the data
beginss trending upward. over ten years, you have average of X2.

If you ignore teh nonstationarity of the data, you would say "hey, there's
been no change, because X1=X2."

But it gets worse.

Let's say you have 20 years of data- and let's say they are de-trended.
Let's say you implement "program X" on 1 Jan 19xx. You begin
implementation, and the progrm is finally "up and running" ten years later.
Depending on what date you *choose* for the breakpoint, you can show (most
likely) no change at all in key variables. Specifically, if we implemented
"gender inytegration" in 1980, but used only same-sex crews until 1985, by
choosing 1980 as the breakpoint you would totally overlook any changes in
trend occuring after teh true event, whoich would have occurred sometime
*after* 1985.

Anyhow, these are only two of themost common ways USAF staffers- many of
them unwittingly- seriously misrepresent many issues.

My favorite is when AFMC uses "Trend Adjusted" statistics to show customer
support is improving when it's actually getting worse. A classic!

Steve Swartz

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
Also, anyone who has taken a good series of stats classes ansd a
research methodologies class would still be *very* skeptical of this type
of
advocacy briefing.

I fail to see why this data is so "skewed" in your view. Divorce rates
among
missile crews was X before gender integration and X after, seems clear cut
to
me that gender integration did not effect divorce rates among married
missileers.

That's why I find it necessary to continue to ask for these "facts," and
am
not satisfied with your "impressions" of the "briefing."

No impression was required, it was statistical data.

The claim that people under these circumstances would not fall prey to
well-documented human nature is a rather big claim, and needs at least
some
proof.

OK, I'll be your proof. Over 150 alerts over a three year period, at least
a
dozen with a woman who was not my wife and I kept my hands (and other
appendages) to myself for the entire 24-hour period. I was good friends
with at
least a dozen other married guys, none of who even hinted they had
comitted
adultery with a female missileer.

Campbell and Stanley
(as well as others) give a good description fo historical confounds in
time
series data. Life in the hole in 1985 was somewhat different from life
in
the hole in 1995.

Really? How so? I'm willing to bet life in the hole was identical from
1962 to
the present day. It was(and still is) a very scripted and monotonous
24-hour
period and with a few minor exceptions unchanged over time or by the
actions of
other nations.

Also, your definition of "fully gender integrated" is somewhat
misleading.
If you look at the percentage of crew population that were serving in
mixed-gender crews from 1985-1995 ytou do not find a magic point in time
where the ration poofed from "None" to "Full" overnight.

Only because your definition of gender integration is an equal population
of
female crewmembers. Using this definition, we are not now, nor will the
missile
community ever be, gender integrated.

Something tells me the "facts" shown by the 0-6s during the "training
briefings" were not that sophisticated. It's pretty easy to demonstrate
falshoods using inappropriate analysis.

Inappropriate analysis? Its simple analysis. Divorce rates before and
after
gender integration and UCMJ prosecution rates for adultery before and
after
integration. How can that data be misleading?

Claiming that
percentage of crewmembers serving in mixed gender crews went from 0 to
50%
"overnight" is an absolute howler.

Who in God's name said that? You're the one using that criteria as the
basis
for gender integration, not me. My definition of gender integration was
the
lifting of the restriction prohibiting woman from serving on Minuteman
crews.
If you use 50% as the magic number, like I said above, we'll never have a
gender integrated missile career. By my best guess, based on the makeup of
the
91st Missile Wing circa 1993, approximately 8-10% of the crewmembers were
female.


or are we choosing to define "full gender integration" at some other,
much
lower, level?

There can be no "level" associated with it. If you use some random level,
I can
argue the USAF as a whole is not gender integrated, but if you look around
you
won't see any WASPs.

Or are you just selectively misrepresenting what you choose to define as
"full gender integration (letting one woman on one crew)?

You're the one trying to somehow associate a percentage with full gender
integration (and a ridiculous level I might add, 50% are you serious?),
I'm not
misrepresenting anything, I'm just supplying you with facts about a life I
lived, everyday, for 3+ years. You seem to be someone who can't handle
facts
counter your personal beliefs.

YGBSM! Read what you wrote- do you honestly believe that what the Air
Force
has done is "study" in any objective sense of the word of this issue?!

Yes.

How long have you been in the war?

You can't be that naive. No way.

You're a "black helicopter" guy aren't you?


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

I was in the 326FIS at RG AFB, MO, flying F102As when the missile
program got into high gear around 1960 or so. The pitch was intense;
the carrot was the 'free' Master's Degree; the stick was life in the
'hole'. There were no takers out of my outfit - we all wanted to fly
and living underground sure didn't meet that goal. Later, word
filtered back that the rosy picture painted during the recruiting
campaign had hidden blemishes - the major one being the frequent
drills - difficult to get into and maintain a serious study mood when
the 'SAC Voice' comes on with coded drill messages (which must then be
decoded - accurately - not all that easy) many times each twenty-four
hours. I suppose the ideal missileer is the same kind of guy that
volunteers for ballistic missile sub duty. Kind of polar opposites
from fighter pilots. BTW Cheyenne is an hour from Fort Collins and
CSU, 1 1/2 hours to Denver. Not too isolated at all.
Walt BJ

snip a bunch of statistical theory not relevant to the issue

Specifically, if we implemented
"gender inytegration" in 1980, but used only same-sex crews until 1985, by
choosing 1980 as the breakpoint you would totally overlook any changes in
trend occuring after teh true event, which would have occurred sometime
*after* 1985.

Which is not the case here. Minuteman gender integration literally happened
over night with dozens of former female Titan crewmembers showing up at
Minuteman wings with T.O.s in hand, ready to pull alert.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

O.K., so if I give you ten examples, and you are able to cast doubt on one
of the ten, you win.

I get it now.

Future Chief of Staff fer sure.

Steve Swartz


"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
snip a bunch of statistical theory not relevant to the issue

Specifically, if we implemented
"gender inytegration" in 1980, but used only same-sex crews until 1985,
by
choosing 1980 as the breakpoint you would totally overlook any changes in
trend occuring after teh true event, which would have occurred sometime
*after* 1985.

Which is not the case here. Minuteman gender integration literally
happened
over night with dozens of former female Titan crewmembers showing up at
Minuteman wings with T.O.s in hand, ready to pull alert.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

O.K., so if I give you ten examples, and you are able to cast doubt on one
of the ten, you win.


If you can give me *one* factual statistic that shows gender integration had a
negative impact on unit readiness (including moral) then you "win". Up till now
you (who has never pulled a single Minuteman alert) have provided exactly zero
in showing how woman have negatively impacted USAF Minuteman units. Meanwhile I
sit here and tell you about statistical data about divorce rates and UCMJ
adultery rates and provide you actual experience in the career field and you
ignore both. Your sole contribution has been to try to insult me by insinuating
that I'm a future COS. I'm convinced you are a lost cause, you cannot be
convinced because you choose not to be convinced. In your view all the data is
skewed and my personal experience (and those of every current and former
Minuteman crewmember I know) is an anomoly that doesn't represent "how things
really are". You sir, are irrational.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Here's a good deal- I'll prove my point with *your* facts. Post, or send
directly, or give me a pointer to where I can find those briefings you were
referring to.

I'm that confident- because what you are claiming is analogous to claiming
that F=ma^2 or 2PV=nRT (well, the social science equivalent at least).

Oh, right- you don't have/can't remember/it was so long ago/ etc. . . .

Steve Swartz.


"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
O.K., so if I give you ten examples, and you are able to cast doubt on
one
of the ten, you win.


If you can give me *one* factual statistic that shows gender integration
had a
negative impact on unit readiness (including moral) then you "win". Up
till now
you (who has never pulled a single Minuteman alert) have provided exactly
zero
in showing how woman have negatively impacted USAF Minuteman units.
Meanwhile I
sit here and tell you about statistical data about divorce rates and UCMJ
adultery rates and provide you actual experience in the career field and
you
ignore both. Your sole contribution has been to try to insult me by
insinuating
that I'm a future COS. I'm convinced you are a lost cause, you cannot be
convinced because you choose not to be convinced. In your view all the
data is
skewed and my personal experience (and those of every current and former
Minuteman crewmember I know) is an anomoly that doesn't represent "how
things
really are". You sir, are irrational.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Here's a good deal- I'll prove my point with *your* facts. Post, or send
directly, or give me a pointer to where I can find those briefings you were
referring to.

Contact the USMT unit at Vandenberg and ask for the UNCLASSIFIED portion of the
Space & Missile orientation course. If they still teach it they should be able
to send it to you. The briefs I saw (got to see it twice) were done using the
best of 1990s technology and as such do not exist electronically, however I'm
confident that Powerpoint was invented while they still taught the section (if
they still don't teach it today, which I'm confident they do).

Oh, right- you don't have/can't remember/it was so long ago/ etc. .

You're a fool.

"I don't have"- No I don't, why would I? You have a copy of every brief you've
recieved since 1991?

"can't remember"- I remember they showed divorce rates (a percentage) before
gender integration and divorce rates after (a percentage) and they were
identical. I remember they showed UCMJ adultery convictions (a hard number per
year) before gender integration and UCMJ convictions (a hard number per year)
after gender integration and the numbers post-integration were actually lower.
These conviction rates were for all 18XX (the old missile ops AFSC) serving at
standing missile wings.

"It was so long ago" - 12 years pal and the briefing was of little interest to
me, I wasn't married at the time. I'm sure you remember the details of any
brief you recieved in the summer of 1991.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Thansk for the lead on the source.

And yes, I still have all my course materials from teh SAC procedures course
in 1988 (as well as earlier stiff going back to all teh materials issued in
basic in 1978).

A little sensitive, are we?

"If you're going to dish it out, you have to be able to take it."

At least I didn't a) attribute someone else's postings to you, b) call you a
liar, c) make references to black helicopters, d) call you an idiot . . .
(etc.)

Steve Swartz

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
Here's a good deal- I'll prove my point with *your* facts. Post, or send
directly, or give me a pointer to where I can find those briefings you
were
referring to.

Contact the USMT unit at Vandenberg and ask for the UNCLASSIFIED portion
of the
Space & Missile orientation course. If they still teach it they should be
able
to send it to you. The briefs I saw (got to see it twice) were done using
the
best of 1990s technology and as such do not exist electronically, however
I'm
confident that Powerpoint was invented while they still taught the section
(if
they still don't teach it today, which I'm confident they do).

Oh, right- you don't have/can't remember/it was so long ago/ etc. .

You're a fool.

"I don't have"- No I don't, why would I? You have a copy of every brief
you've
recieved since 1991?

"can't remember"- I remember they showed divorce rates (a percentage)
before
gender integration and divorce rates after (a percentage) and they were
identical. I remember they showed UCMJ adultery convictions (a hard number
per
year) before gender integration and UCMJ convictions (a hard number per
year)
after gender integration and the numbers post-integration were actually
lower.
These conviction rates were for all 18XX (the old missile ops AFSC)
serving at
standing missile wings.

"It was so long ago" - 12 years pal and the briefing was of little
interest to
me, I wasn't married at the time. I'm sure you remember the details of any
brief you recieved in the summer of 1991.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

And yes, I still have all my course materials from teh SAC procedures course
in 1988

Which doesn't answer my question about copies of all syllabus briefings, I'll
take your answer to mean you don't have copies either.

A little sensitive, are we?

No.

"If you're going to dish it out, you have to be able to take it."

At least I didn't a) attribute someone else's postings to you, b) call you a
liar, c) make references to black helicopters, d) call you an idiot . . .
(etc.)


Your statement declaring that I will someday become CoS was not meant as a
compliment, it was delivered and recieved as an insult. You're they one who
needs to decide whether or not you should be "dishing it out".


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"