First, I haven't read every post. I only looked at the posts with
"statistics" calculations. I am trying to deftly side-step the personal
feelings and red-faced responses that have occured within this tread.
So what do I have to post? Just some comments about "statistics" and the
weight in an argument they should carry.
My thoughts:
1. "statistics" and the "numbers" that are used in reporting them are NOT SCIENTIFIC FACTS! Most stats start off by using very subjective questions and assumptions. So when I see someone say "you have been presented with some facts...and your argument is bogus" (paraphased) I can't help but cringe.
2. Let me be clear. Statistics are not "data" to PROVE a point or answer a
question. "Statistics" are empirical in nature. Statistics, however, can
be used to HELP make a prediction or weight an argument.
3. You can start off with very different but logical assumptions about a
single question and end up with contrary "statistical" results. For example, you can find a statistical correlation between geography and poor health care.
But is it the state we live in? Or the economics of the region? Or that an
unknown variable of werewolves eating doctors in that county?
4. Statistically speaking, people have a better chance of being killed by asteroid
impact than by shark attack even when they are swimming amongst a bunch of sharks.
One event, I am assured death because the asteroid gets everyone. The other
event among the sharks, I am personally worried, but I am only one person of 3 billion - so the statistical chance is low. Hey, what is that nibbling on my
toe?
5. Every debate and argument can be supplied with "statistics" to support their
cause on both sides. Before I would start to quote the ESPN odds on the
whole issue, I would like to know what the baseline assumptions are because
everytime I see odds, statistics, and percentages used on most entertainment
and news programs they are at least incompete or at worst nonsense.
6. There is a difference between "statistical odds" and "mathematical odds."
This whole debate is in the realm of "statistical odds" which has much less
traction in an argument.
Dr. Joe
P.S. Yes, I use statistics everyday, but I know the assumptions, the question,
and am careful how to critically analyze what they "might" be saying. I never
use them to conclude a factual result only subjective possibility.
--------------------
Dr. Joseph HowardJoe's Physics Page "Imagine what you could do,
if you could do what you imagine" F.O.S. Member & Physics ResearcherUranium Pearl - 16 lbs
Uranium Solid - 15 lbs
Cobalt Bomb - 15 lbs
Tsunami H^2O - 15 lbs
Bullet - 16lbs
XXXL - 16lbs
Lane 1: 4 Ball Roller
Edited on 8/11/2006 12:58 PM
Edited on 8/11/2006 1:09 PM