&gt; I&#x27;m asking for specific measurements. E.g., &quot;data showing that holding economics constant, certain groups wildly underperform&quot;.<p>I don&#x27;t understand. What measurement would have convinced <i>you</i> that it is impossible for humans to cross the Atlantic in under a day? You&#x27;re making an impossibility claim and ask me to come with a measurement to verify it. I guess I could come up with a very long and boring series of experiments, each invalidating a possible approach, but nothing that you couldn&#x27;t think of yourself.<p>&gt; Of course, if your views are faith based then no such measurement exists.<p>Both of our views are largely based on values (although mine is augmented by study) but the difficulty of proving an impossibility result is not a consequence of that. Also, I&#x27;m not sure why you choose to call values &quot;faith&quot;. Not that I mind, but &quot;value&quot; is the familiar philosophical (and psychological) term that is most apt here.<p>&gt; Anyway, good to know that there is little in this discussion beyond assertions of faith and dodging the core questions.<p>As someone who implies that his views are based on measurements, you seem strangely incapable of listening and processing new input. Remember, valuable input does not have to be raw data, if, for example, it points out that your mathematical reasoning is based on unfounded assumptions. You don&#x27;t &quot;know&quot; what you have just said any more than you did before joining the conversation. You pre-supposed that, and then didn&#x27;t try to understand what I was saying. Which goes to show that mere observation doesn&#x27;t change any conclusion if it is never processed by the observer.<p>How do you expect to have an interesting conversation if you don&#x27;t make the effort to understand what the other side is actually saying? Aren&#x27;t you even curious to see whether you could come up with good arguments to counter the other side&#x27;s actual arguments? It&#x27;s OK to accidentally talk past one another because of a misunderstanding, but it seems like you&#x27;re making a conscious effort to <i>not</i> understand what people are saying (and not just me), and then respond to your own made-up distortion by ridiculing that made-up position. What&#x27;s the point?