**** Elections thread *****

[Poopadoop]

^
I'm just going to assume this is some rage mixed with insults.

Banana, you've already shown you don't understand simple concepts like 'averaging over samples'.

Maybe stop trying to act like you understand statistics or science in general.

[BananaStand]

^
I'm just going to assume this is some rage mixed with insults.

Banana, you've already shown you don't understand simple concepts like 'averaging over samples'.

Maybe stop trying to act like you understand statistics or science in general.

If its your goal here to assert yourself as a statistician and me as a non-statistician, then congratulations, you win.

You're still missing the point. Your status as a statistician did absolutely NOTHING to help you glean anything meaningful from the data given.

Keep that abacus greased nerd.

[Poopadoop]

Your status as a statistician did absolutely NOTHING to help you glean anything meaningful from the data given.

It absolutely did, you just don't understand what it was. There's a difference between saying 'this is meaningless because you did it wrong and came to the wrong conclusion' and 'this is meaningless because it confirmed my intuition'.

Of course you're not qualified to make either of those statements, which makes your continued efforts to argue all the more comically absurd.

[BananaStand]

It absolutely did,

only if you live in nerd-village

There's a difference between saying 'this is meaningless because you did it wrong and came to the wrong conclusion' and 'this is meaningless because it confirmed my intuition'.

I actually said neither of those things.

I said "this is meaningless because it's missing so much important and relevant shit". But if you wanna be an ass hole about it, I guess i'll rephrase......"you did it wrong"

[Poopadoop]

only if you live in nerd-village


I actually said neither of those things.

I said "this is meaningless because it's missing so much important and relevant shit". But if you wanna be an ass hole about it, I guess i'll rephrase......"you did it wrong"

Your lack of understanding is just no barrier to you continuing the conversation is it?

My first post on the subject mentioned the issues around what scientists call 'validity' and you call 'something something demographics'.

My second post was a look at the data itself without regard to validity, to see how big the effect was assuming it was valid.

Your argument was the second post was meaningless because you already knew the study was invalid, without even seeing it, but just because you heard a conclusion that ran counter to your own world view.

I know this is deep stuff, but basically what it means is you know next-to-nothing about it and should probably acknowledge that. But I know you won't because then you'd be losing an argument and the chance to keep spewing out the bile. So I'm going to leave it instead.