- Dec 1, 2019
- 8,605
- 14,612
- Thread starter monroe
- Start date
- Apr 22, 2019
- 2,041
- 1,809
- Jan 3, 2018
- 4,915
- 10,316
lmao
your poor niece, being slandered! Yeah, but that's an exception & exceptions don't really alter anything with regards to the facts.
We are not talking about air travel vs car travel in the hands of people with no experience. That's a crapshoot lol
As I said, take the numbers from "accidents, injuries and fatalities per capita".
If the number of accidents, injuries and fatalities is higher for one, than for the other, per capita, then the one with the higher number is the less safe method.
Facts are facts, whichever way they fall.
Yup. 100%.
- Jan 3, 2018
- 4,915
- 10,316
- Apr 22, 2019
- 2,041
- 1,809
Again, it depends on how you define safety and danger. The definitions are where the devils reside in statistics. Are other factors (such as potential exposure to an airborne pandemic) being accounted for?lmao
Yeah, but that's an exception & exceptions don't really alter anything with regards to the facts.
We are not talking about air travel vs car travel in the hands of people with no experience. That's a crapshoot lol
As I said, take the numbers from "accidents, injuries and fatalities per capita".
If the number of accidents, injuries and fatalities is higher for one, than for the other, per capita, then the one with the higher number is the less safe method.
Facts are facts, whichever way they fall.
Yup. 100%.
You must be registered to see the links
Always understand what definitions / assumptions are in use to understand the analysis.
- Jan 3, 2018
- 4,915
- 10,316
lol yeah, then we have to start calculating probabilities.
Fortunately, that's why there are statisticians who do this shit for a living to produce categorical statements.
Same thing still applies. The person who says "X is safer than Y" needs to define which metrics they are calculating this opinion by.
Then the facts will either support, or deny.
Someone else may wish to take other metrics into consideration.
Again, that's what happens if we choose to present our opinion, it's open to be challenged.
If we don't want our opinion challenged, we should keep it to ourself.
Last edited:
- Apr 22, 2019
- 2,041
- 1,809
Statisticians, to put it bluntly, are people hired by other people and therefore have agendas. Always try to understand their assumptions and definitions. Typically there is a wide range for any category of study -- that always comes back to the definitions used, assuming all parties are honest.
- Jan 3, 2018
- 4,915
- 10,316
100% agree, can't do anything with unknown entities
Yeah, in a lot of circumstance the conclusion presented is not trustworthy, due to agenda of the people producing it and what they're trying to show (& why).
I would prefer to see the figures & draw my own conclusion, if possible.
- Dec 1, 2019
- 8,605
- 14,612
Actually, in my (professional) experience, almost all statistics used by sources we call "reliable" (so not that one uncle's facebook post) actually are reliable and correct in and of itself. You are correct that it is important to understand what has been asked or measured first, and often you need additional information before you can come to a conclusion what something means.
Statistics are an exact science, even if dealing with probabilities, so an agenda does not hurt the statistic itself, because that can be checked. An agenda may affect what gets published and what does not, it may affect the headline in the press statement - but that's usually not the statistician's doing anymore.
- Apr 22, 2019
- 2,041
- 1,809
It can also affect the headline and obscure the underlying data. For example, measurements of the upper atmosphere cooling have been used in an attempt to rebut global warming as has short-term satellite data.
The reports are true. The conclusions are not. The assumptions and definitions explained why.
Additionally, even though the FSM community has long noted the correlation of piracy prevalence and global warming does not in fact show any causation.
- Dec 1, 2019
- 8,605
- 14,612
Well, it's an old adage that correlation does not equal causation (although, as xkcd put it, it often winks at you) and especially with modern data mining techniques you'll be able to find the oddest correlations which of course have no other connection. However, statistics itself are solid, it is what is made of them, as in your examples.
It may be, though, as much as I love this topic, we went slightly off topic.
Why can't I reach Hotel level 5?
- Jan 3, 2018
- 4,915
- 10,316
- Dec 1, 2019
- 8,605
- 14,612
We really need to stop doing that, it starts to creep me out
- Jan 3, 2018
- 4,915
- 10,316
Yeah, first couple of times, OK, coincidence.We really need to stop doing that, it starts to creep me out
Now, just fucking spooky!
- May 19, 2018
- 2,981
- 7,121
Some guy doesn't like lesbians, next thing we are on Global Warming and whether it's safer to fly or travel by car. It amazes me how a porn game can bring out such diverse conversationsWe really need to stop doing that, it starts to creep me out
- Dec 1, 2019
- 8,605
- 14,612
Sorry, don't have the old one. Just for future reference, maybe you did what I once did too, and forgot to copy your "profile" folder to the new folder. If it's still in the trash, you may be able to recover it. Apart from that, always copy your save folder unlike in RenPy
- May 19, 2018
- 2,981
- 7,121