Bungee Jumper

Yeah, I'm sure sending them lots of emails is going to invest in broadcasting infrastructure.

Give up already. You're wrong, and you'll continue to be wrong until you understand the math.

Oh, damn. I forgot to wish Tedy Bruschi a happy birthday this past Monday...

If I had to guess, I'd say you're just being glib...but anyone who considers Buffalo-Denber snow joke imbalance a real problem is leading a very charmed life.

To wit, I say: so what? Lots of people disagree with Bush on Iraq. I disagree with Bush on Iraq. I don't see why this should be news just because Ford is dead.

I have provided specifics. And math. Regression is a function of the variance in a statistical distribution. Period. That's specific, and it's math. And it's right. And it's exactly what you haven't been saying.

No, it's a reflection on your math skills. You haven't been trying to explain math at all...you haven't used any. You don't understand what Stanford and UC's web sites (not "Stanford and UC," you moron) are saying. If you could derive the effect MATHEMATICALLY, you'd know excatly what said pages are trying to say and why you misunderstand them. You can't.

I feel frustrated by twist-ties...

No, I'm sure he wrote a low-level TCP wrapper and his very own HTML parser in VB.

You wrote it in VB. You're as much a programming god as Holcomb's Arm is a math whiz.

I'm sure in a week you're going to be the twist-ties' biggest fan, though...

They tend to wander around and get lost a lot... I could see doing that for Alzheimer's patients. Hell, having dealt with Alzheimer's patients myself, I'd support it. But "the elderly"?

These guys play football, Bill. It's what they do. Any player who'd be satisfied to sit out the last game for eight months, so they don't get hurt, doesn't deserve a roster spot. Any coach who'd sit such a player doesn't deserve good players.

Don't know why; they obviously don't trust him enough to kick a game-winning 44-yard chip shot that anyone could make... [/sarcasm]

7:30 in. Learn to count.

Please don't cry if I don't.

Sure thing, little Hulkster. Let me know when you server more than oatmeal to the warfighters...

Kicked balls typically spin end-for-end. Thrown balls spiral along the long axis. A nice, tight spiral will be less affected by the wind than a ball tumbling end-for-end. The real question is: why the hell would you throw it to the end zone on 4th and 5 with 41 seconds left? SDS is right in asking why TWO receivers were in the end zone, particularly when their QB was scrambling, particularly when 7 yards gets you the first down AND makes a FG 37 yards vs. 44 yards (which is a big difference even without the wind). Someone - I'm leaning toward Fairchild at the moment, but I don't really know who - botched that last play big-time.

Let's not be too harsh. I doubt he cries over professional wrestling or anything...

Retarded. Forget the bigotry, forget the democratic process. The guy's bitching about immigration reform because an American-born Congressman is a convert to Islam. I remember, way back when in my logic classes in college, we had a word for this kind of reasoning. It was called "bull sh--".

In that wind? Were you watching the game? Did you see what the winds in that end were doing to kicks all day? A 45-yard FG at that end was not some sort of chip shot. It was chancy, at best.

But that still doesn't equate to "cause". That may just be inexactness due to you trying to explain math to a pinhead (in fact, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say it is). But it's just that inexactness that's led to this discussion going on for two thousand posts. What you mean to say, I think, is that the regression of normally distributed error towards the mean of the error can look like regression to the mean of the population. That's not a "causal" relationship...in fact, it's really not any sort of relationship, since you're talking about two independent statistical distrubitions. It just appears to be, to people like HA who think they're mathematicians yet can't define terms like "variance".

Of course, the correct answer is NEITHER. Error does not CAUSE regression toward the mean. Error itself can regress toward the mean of the error...

What would the correllation coefficient of the two test scores be, then?

Jesus Christ. Did you even read his example?