?

Why?

Ok so basically put, there was a discussion on a message board about the OJ Simpson case and a poster was discussing how he changed after the verdict.

"Starting that month and ever since, I review all resumes that come in to my company for all jobs, and if the resume appears to be from a black, I toss it in the garbage. Interestingly, I've mentioned this to several other business owners over the years and found that they too did the same thing, some because of OJ and others for other reasons."

So is that....well is that allowed? To refuse to hire someone purely based on their presumed race, not because of a lack of qualifications or anything like that? Would that not fall under employment discrimination laws or am I missing something?

a. variability

b. reactivity

c. reliability

d. complexity

a. variability

b. reactivity

c. reliability

d. complexity

1. If a measure is reliable, it:

a. produces a consistent result if the same thing is measured twice.

b. measures what it was intended to measure.

c. predicts actual behavior.

d. covaries with the independent variable.

2. If a measure is valid, it:

a. produces a consistent result if the same thing is measured twice.

b. measures what it was intended to measure.

c. predicts actual behavior.

d. covaries with the independent variable.

http://i.imgur.com/eVXrxV8.png

I'm having trouble figuring out how to calculate t and the p-value for problem C. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Many homeowners buy detectors to check for the invisible gas radon in their homes. How accurate are these detectors? To answer this question, university researchers placed 12 radon detectors in a chamber that exposed them to 105 picocuries per liter of radon. The detector readings were as follows.(/ are used to separate the numbers)

96.9/ 96.9/ 94.8/ 101.8/ 107.4/ 99.7/ 96.2/ 103.2/ 107.4/ 103.2/ 99.7/ 116.5

What is the t and what is the p-value? I tried doing the T-test on my calculator but I can't figure out what to put for μ? Help is greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Ok, the problem is hard to type onto something like this because it involves a chart so here is a photo of the problem:

http://i.imgur.com/I9M86nv.png

Here are the two questions:

1. What is the probability that the EIA is positive for a randomly chosen person from this population?

2. What is the probability that a person has the antibody given that the EIA test is positive?

Please explain the methods used to solve this. Thank you.

1. Choose an employed person at random. Let A be the event that the person chosen is a woman, and B the event that the person holds a managerial or professional job. Government data tell us that P(A) = 0.47 and the probability of managerial and professional jobs among women is P(B|A) = 0.36. Find the probability that a randomly chosen employed person is a woman holding a managerial or professional position.

2.Here is the distribution of the adjusted gross income (in thousands of dollars) reported on individual federal income tax returns in 1994.

Income: <10, 10-29, 30-49, 50-99, 100

Probability: 0.11, 0.4, 0.25, 0.14, 0.1

Given that a return shows an income of at least $50,000, what is the conditional probability that the income is at least $100,000?

If you can explain how you got the answer, rather than just give it to me, that would be greatly appreciated.

My friend's $200 headphones got stolen. They were a sentimental gift from a departed loved one so its more important than it sounds. A kid with a juvenile record left the school the same day for good the same day the headphones were stolen. Should I even leave a tip to the police? I don't know his address but I might be able to find it in an address book. Even if the police go to his house, he lets them in, and they find the headphones, how can we prove that they were stolen and belong to my friend? Should I even bother?

i may not have the full story so I apologize if I'm wrong but they kid who they stabbed to death wasn't innocent. Wasn't he high on meth and pointing a gun at somebody? I don't support the Hells Angels for their history of racism, drug dealing, and unprovoked violence, but in this case, it seems like they saved somebody's life.

Of course that doesn't justify the fact that they planned to assassinate Mick Jagger 6 years later, but at that concert, why were they blamed for what happened?

So I'm trying to make a comment on a status for the Breaking Bad facebook page. But after I comment, it appears to be posted. But later, I revisited the status, with one of my own facebook page and my comment was nowhere to be seen. The comment only appears if I'm looking at the status or a friend is looking at the status but it's invisible to anyone who's not friends with me (such as 99% of the people looking at the status).

I've heard the claim that Snowden leaked documents to the press that apparently put our military and undercover operatives at risk. how is revealing that the US is spying on us putting our military and undercover operatives at risk? When I think of traitor, I think of someone like Robert Hanssen, who leaked secret information to our enemies. Snowden gave information to the American public, not America's enemies.

Anyone who's seen the movie understands how strange and morally ambiguous the main character was. so did you view him as a hero or a psycho? Why?

Ok so I write an essay about how I don't think Huckleberry Finn is a racist book. I take a quote where Sally asks Huck if anyone was hurt? Huck says "no maam. killed a N!88er" I explained that the intention of that scene was not to dehumanize blacks but to show how people of that time period dehumanized blacks.A classmate edited my paper and in that section of the paper wrote down two words: Prove it

I don't know how I prove that the intention was to show racism as opposed to being racist. Really? How the **** do you "prove" it? I thought it was pretty obvious. What do I do? is there anything I can do? For the record, the guy who edited the paper adamantly believes that Huckleberry Finn is a racist book (and he's white as a marshmallow)

He swears frequently but seems to draw the line at the F-word as shown in chapter 25. Why is that?

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

Did he actually say this or is it a misquote? I can't find anything online confirming or refuting it.

And what is the relation?

Wasn't the whole issue between Britain and Iran because Iran was trying to nationalize AIOC (Anglo Iranian Oil Company)? What caused the US to help Britain in overthrowing the prime minister? Britain had an obvious motivation. What about America? What was their motivation(s)?

Sources if possible please