<p>Afterhours, so you're a junior transfer, right? If not, then how can you say that you picked USC's business school over Cal's business school, seeing as how you don't start at Haas until junior year? BTW, where is Vanderbilt?</p>
<p>Nsped..so you're saying they automatically add onto Berkeley's GPA to all law schools that we apply to. Bonus for us. </p>
<p>And stop trying to attack me through worthless criticism : "oh if you did your research..." </p>
<p>Your last post simply helped to substantiate my point that our GPAs are boosted, instead of actually refuting it.</p>
<p>GentlemanandScholar--I know.</p>
<p>Afterhourse is a liar, proven by his ignorance of Haas..which he supposedly rejected for USC's business school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Nsped..so you're saying they automatically add onto Berkeley's GPA to all law schools that we apply to. Bonus for us.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But that is not necessarily a good thing; once again, compare Georgetown's mean GPA with UCB's. They are both universalized by the LSAT. If UCB receives a bonus, then so does Georgetown, need I go further? </p>
<p>
[quote]
And stop trying to attack me through worthless criticism : "oh if you did your research..."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The criticism is only worthless if you do not take it seriously; you need to engage in actual research before rendering statements and arguments.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Your last post simply helped to substantiate my point that our GPAs are boosted, instead of actually refuting it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Once again, nothing negates the fact that the admit rate at Georgetown, which is ranked lower, is higher; moreover, since Georgetown also does not give a GPA above 4.0, one must logically assume that such students also obtain a 'boost' in their GPA. Taking into account the relative increases realized by converting the GPA through LSAC, it is pellucid that a Georgetown graduate requires a substantially less GPA to be admitted into Top 15 law schools than a UCB grad.</p>
<p>
[quote]
GentlemanandScholar--I know.</p>
<p>Afterhourse is a liar, proven by his ignorance of Haas..which he supposedly rejected for USC's business school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's called transferring. Quite novel huh?</p>
<p>Columbia University (4)
2004 65 5 13 2 3 0 172 3.89
2003 76 6 8 1 4 1 170 3.76
2002 65 3 10 0 1 0 173 3.90
2001 61 17 12 3 5 2 168 3.65
2000 51 10 13 3 1 0 170 3.79
1999 54 13 9 2 2 1 170 3.83
1998 31 9 8 2 3 0 168 3.76</p>
<p>Nsped--May I ask why you chose the year with the smallest percentage of admits?</p>
<p>Thus you could have chosen either 13/65; 8/76/; 10/65; 12/61; 13/51; 9/54; or 8/31...and you chose yes 8/76...</p>
<p>This is why a statistician would not believe your theory. Firstly, this is an observation, not an experiment. Secondly, you are ultimately biased in choosing your population, in this case the population being 2003 applicants from Berkeley instead of choosing the other years' applicants as your population. </p>
<p>You ultimately chose the year that had the least percentage accepted to try and prove your theory. So please, if you learn anything from statistics, know that observations, especially biased ones, prove nothing. You would have to run a simple random sample in order to actually obtain accurate information in proving that Berkeley graduates are at a disadvantage.</p>
<p>Afterhours--is this another lie or did you really transfer?</p>
<p>From what community college? How did you complete Haas' prerequisites from there? Explain, explain.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Nsped--May I ask why you chose the year with the smallest percentage of admits?</p>
<p>Thus you could have chosen either 13/65; 8/76/; 10/65; 12/61; 13/51; 9/54; or 8/31...and you chose yes 8/76...</p>
<p>This is why a statistician would not believe your theory. Firstly, this is an observation, not an experiment. Secondly, you are ultimately biased in choosing your population, in this case the population being 2003 applicants from Berkeley instead of choosing the other years' applicants as your population.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I chose 2003 because that was the only year available on Georgetown's website; the selection was not arbitrary. I stated my reason for choosing 2003 in a previous post.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So please, if you learn anything from statistics, know that observations, especially biased ones, prove nothing.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So please, learn to read.</p>
<p>And take a mathematics course. </p>
<p>You would understand why your argument is faulty.</p>
<p>Ok you are a liar NSPED..your website, which you gave me, clearly shows Georgetown's 2004 statistics.</p>
<p>YOU gave me the site..and it has 2004's numbers I REPEAT..
There are enough liars on this site.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Since you are intransigent, I did the homework for you:</p>
<p><a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/Law/lawStats.stm%5B/url%5D">http://career.berkeley.edu/Law/lawStats.stm</a>
Since we wish to compare the same years: For 2003, Harvard admitted 3 students out of 64.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My reasoning is not fallacious in the least. I have answered every single rejoinder, no matter how pedestrian. What will you argue next?</p>
<p>If your attitude is at all representative of the UCB mindset, it is no surprise that its law school admit rates are lacking.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ok you are a liar NSPED..your website, which you gave me, clearly shows Georgetown's 2004 statistics.</p>
<p>YOU gave me the site..and it has 2004's numbers I REPEAT..
There are enough liars on this site.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My apologies, the linked I clicked said '2003'. I will run through the numbers again for you.</p>
<p>Wow. So after all this, I suppose you are in law school and majored in what, rhetoric? (With absolutely no background in mathematics I see.)</p>
<p>And yet you know how to divide two numbers? </p>
<p>(Cheap blows--if you can give them, learn how to take them. )</p>
<p>Columbia
Applied/Admitted/Percentage:
UCB: 65/13/20%
Georgetown: 185/35/18%</p>
<p>Mean GPA/LSAT:
UCB: 172/3.89
Georgetown: 172/3.72</p>
<p>Stanford
Applied/Admitted/Percentage:
UCB: 76/3/4%
Georgetown: 85/7/8%</p>
<p>Mean GPA/LSAT:
UCB: 170/3.99
Georgetown: 170/3.89</p>
<p>Harvard
Applied/Admitted/Percentage:
UCB: 63/12/19%
Georgetown: 129/18/14%</p>
<p>Mean GPA/LSAT:
UCB: 171/3.93
Georgetown: 172/3.84</p>
<p>UCB only wins percentage-wise with Columbia and Harvard, but the victory is short-lived, for students at Georgetown require a substantially less GPA to remain competitive.</p>
<p>In anticipation of your UCB 'GPA Boost' rejoinder, because your reading skills are foundering, I will paste my argument that this 'boost' is not exclusive to UCB:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Once again, nothing negates the fact that the admit rate at Georgetown, which is ranked lower, is higher; moreover, since Georgetown also does not give a GPA above 4.0, one must logically assume that such students also obtain a 'boost' in their GPA. Taking into account the relative increases realized by converting the GPA through LSAC, it is pellucid that a Georgetown graduate requires a substantially less GPA to be admitted into Top 15 law schools than a UCB grad.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Nspeds--I have to say, you would make a great attorney because you highlight what helps you, even though the percentages prove that UCB had , percentage-wise, more admits than Georgetown. Thus you're good at INACCURATE manipulation.</p>
<p>Ok, So I am looking at the LSAC site that you gave me, and I can't find where it states that every university's graduates have altered GPAs, including the Ivy grads. (I thought that only UCB's and certain other universities had boosted GPAs when applying to graduate schools, considering 90% of Ivy students have GPAs of 3.0 or higher.)</p>
<p>So, since you are just a supreme researcher, why don't you link it for me, or was this another bogus site?</p>
<p>Instead of you rambling on, I want evidence. EVIDENCE....your words mean nothing to me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Afterhours--is this another lie or did you really transfer?</p>
<p>From what community college? How did you complete Haas' prerequisites from there? Explain, explain.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Seriously are you on drugs or something or are you really this OCD in real life? Of course I transferred, what do you want me to scan evidence of this? Cause I'll do it if it means that you'll get off my case. </p>
<p>Split time between SMC and Mt SAC. I finished the UC articulation agreement with CA community colleges and then took the pre-reqs for biz like micro, macro, calc, prob, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Nspeds--I have to say, you would make a great attorney because you highlight what helps you, even though the percentages prove that UCB had , percentage-wise, more admits than Georgetown. Thus you're good at INACCURATE manipulation.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I will only exert a modest amount of patience for your idiocy:
[quote]
UCB only wins percentage-wise with Columbia and Harvard, but the victory is short-lived, for students at Georgetown require a substantially less GPA to remain competitive.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ok, So I am looking at the LSAC site that you gave me, and I can't find where it states that every university's graduates have altered GPAs, including the Ivy grads. (I thought that only UCB's and certain other universities had boosted GPAs when applying to graduate schools, considering 90% of Ivy students have GPAs of 3.0 or higher.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I do not care if you cannot find it; it is common sense that if one is applying to an ABA accredited law school from a college in the United States, one must go through the LSAC. Once you register, your school does not send transcripts directly to law schools, they send it to the LSAC, and they propagate an altered GPA.</p>
<p>Moreover, to further demonstrate my point, at the bottom of the UCB Law School Stats Site, the source is, indeed, the 'Law School Admissions Council'. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Instead of you rambling on, I want evidence. EVIDENCE....your words mean nothing to me.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Continue in your illiteracy, and no words will mean anything to you.</p>
<p>Afterhours-- Ok, I'll believe you. But I have to ask why are you so condescending towards Berkeley if you were a transfer student?</p>
<p>Since zip is lethargic:</p>
[quote]
Grades are converted by LSAC to a standard 4.0 system in order to furnish law schools with a uniform basis for comparing applicants. LSAC-member schools, in establishing the LSDAS, have selected a common set of numerical values to represent the various grading systems used by colleges. This system may vary from that of the college which you attended.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It took me less than a minute to find that. You really are an...</p>
<p>Nsped--resorting to worthless criticisms is just foul play, even for an aspiring lawyer like yourself. </p>
<p>Since you can't find written proof (which is altogether unfortunate for a lawyer who supposedly builds his/her cases upon evidence), you resort to insulting my verbal skills. </p>
<p>Firstly, you gave me the link to LSAC.org in order to prove to me that the GPAs are altered, and yet when I ask you to show me where it elucidates this...you can't find it. Thus, do you not dish out bogus websites in order to make yourself feel more intelligent or make your unjustified arguments seem more rational?
* Not to mention you lied to me about not being able to locate Georgetown's 2004 statistics. </p>
<p>So until you show me the evidence, I will not believe a single word you say. You perseverate all these theories that you have, yet when I ask you to prove them to me through the sites you give me, you insult me for no apparent reason.</p>
<p>I'm truly apologetic that I want evidence for your worthless theories. However, keep in mind that being an attorney is more than just dishing out unwarranted criticisms; it actually requires proof. </p>
<p>(Call me illiterate; I call you mathematically deficient. )</p>