The Statistics Game
This is a discussion on The Statistics Game within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; As an academic, i learned long ago that if you don't like someone's argument, challenge his data, not his overall argument. I got this crime ...
Post By Gaius
Post By rstickle
Post By high pockets
January 1st, 2013 12:19 PM
The Statistics Game
As an academic, i learned long ago that if you don't like someone's argument, challenge his data, not his overall argument. I got this crime data vid off another forum. It's pretty good.
Choose Your Own Crime Stats - YouTube
Best way to win a gun fight? "That's easy, don't show up."
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything."
January 1st, 2013 12:34 PM
You can extrapolate almost anything you want from the huge morass of data on gun crime and gun ownership. That's because there's no cause-and-effect. It's just a bunch of numbers from myriad situations, all of which have their own particular set of circumstances that these numbers don't and can't measure. Sure, you can probably tease out some correlations between things but, at the end of the day, they are just associations and nothing more. At best, all this data tells us is nothing. At worst, it can mislead us to make the wrong conclusions, to think we know the answer and to act accordingly. Even though you can find associations that benefit our argument as law-abiding people who support the Second Amendment, they still hold no water. The fact is that our Second Amendment ensures us these rights as law-abiding citizens and no amount of faulty, cherry-picked, misleading data on gun crime, gun ownership, or anything else should revoke or intrude upon those rights.
January 1st, 2013 01:18 PM
One of my favorites from a stat professor in college was... "Statistics now show that everyone who ate tomatoes in 1825 has died!" (The class was in the 1970's.)
EOD - Initial success or total failure
January 1st, 2013 02:46 PM
That's really quite unfortunate! I mean, only about 93% of people (in total) have died, so for an entire cohort of tomato-eaters to be wiped out is a bit horrifying! I mean, statistically speaking, shouldn't at least 7% of them have lived???
Originally Posted by rstickle
January 1st, 2013 06:37 PM
My stats professor was able to prove, through our class, that drinking milk led to smoking marijuana.
This was proven by the fact that every student who admitted ever smoking marijuana had a history of drinking milk as a child.
"If you make something idiot proof, someone will make a better idiot."
January 2nd, 2013 08:53 AM
Honestly, a thorough understanding of statistical theory and reasoning makes people's lives a lot better. It's better to understand how to detect good statistics than to just be satisfied with being skeptical of all statistics. It would only take about 40 hours of online learning to become reasonably conversant; this is pretty useful if you plan on living a few more decades?