Orlando Buffalo Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 1 hour ago, redtail hawk said: Yes, because the absolute number of deaths between hot and cold were a factor of 3 different. The differences for deaths in hot countries on the same scale would have been less visually apparent graphically. they'd already been presented numerically. ON THE FIRST PAGE! What is sad with your argument is that one of the topics we discuss in stats with students is all the ways that people can present real data while clearly trying to mislead, and one of big ones is messing with the scale on two separate graphs with same information. But I found another graph that supports your belief. 1 1
Doc Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 12 hours ago, Orlando Tim said: I don't know if Lancet is considered a reliable source but this is pathetic. This kind of dishonesty is why people don't trust "experts" anymore, they leave out all of the real info to make a point. No they are not. Haven't been for decades.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Orlando Tim said: What is sad with your argument is that one of the topics we discuss in stats with students is all the ways that people can present real data while clearly trying to mislead, and one of big ones is messing with the scale on two separate graphs with same information. But I found another graph that supports your belief. Let's concentrate on one study at a time. The hot/cold study was published in an obscure branch of Lancet dealing with population health. And yes, Lancet's main journal is considered among the best and most widely read medical journals in the world. This particular article in this particular journal will be read by very few people except scientists in the field who can easily understand the data as presented and will read it critically. I suspect you also understand the meaning of the data but care not to acknowledge it. It's not intended to mislead the public but to inform the science community. Someone had to look very hard to find a tiny detail in a table that bears no impact on the findings of the study. Stop being obtuse. You look for what you hope to find and when you don't find it, you amplify some trivial data presentation method. If only you were as diligent in your interest in info on trump's crimes and how he devised them...Even if the authors were trying to mislead (and they weren't) it's nothing compared to the lies trump and MAGA's spout every day. Everything is not a conspiracy but Jan 6 was. Edited July 25, 2023 by redtail hawk 1
Irv Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 When does the Demented Biden impeachment trial start? 2
Orlando Buffalo Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 10 hours ago, redtail hawk said: Let's concentrate on one study at a time. The hot/cold study was published in an obscure branch of Lancet dealing with population health. And yes, Lancet's main journal is considered among the best and most widely read medical journals in the world. This particular article in this particular journal will be read by very few people except scientists in the field who can easily understand the data as presented and will read it critically. I suspect you also understand the meaning of the data but care not to acknowledge it. It's not intended to mislead the public but to inform the science community. Someone had to look very hard to find a tiny detail in a table that bears no impact on the findings of the study. Stop being obtuse. You look for what you hope to find and when you don't find it, you amplify some trivial data presentation method. If only you were as diligent in your interest in info on trump's crimes and how he devised them...Even if the authors were trying to mislead (and they weren't) it's nothing compared to the lies trump and MAGA's spout every day. Everything is not a conspiracy but Jan 6 was. We won't agree because we are truly arguing two different things. You are arguing that the data was accurate, which is true. I am showing you that this kind of presentation is improper. If I accept that no malfeasance was intentional then the next question is what is the purpose of the table at all? It is beyond useless, simply show the raw numbers instead of using the bars. The table is at very best poorly done to the point that it is worthless in that context, since a table is supposed to make it easier to compare not more difficult. 1 1
SoCal Deek Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 1 minute ago, Orlando Tim said: We won't agree because we are truly arguing two different things. You are arguing that the data was accurate, which is true. I am showing you that this kind of presentation is improper. If I accept that no malfeasance was intentional then the next question is what is the purpose of the table at all? It is beyond useless, simply show the raw numbers instead of using the bars. The table is at very best poorly done to the point that it is worthless in that context, since a table is supposed to make it easier to compare not more difficult. Maybe this belongs in the Covid thread but was the hypothesis here that the virus did better in cold weather because people were more apt to be closed up, together, inside?
Orlando Buffalo Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Maybe this belongs in the Covid thread but was the hypothesis here that the virus did better in cold weather because people were more apt to be closed up, together, inside? The main premise was what kills people more as a main factor, hot or cold? The final tally was more than 10:1 cold killed more but the graph was made to look like the numbers were kinda similar. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said: The main premise was what kills people more as a main factor, hot or cold? The final tally was more than 10:1 cold killed more but the graph was made to look like the numbers were kinda similar. Nope. It was 3:1. You’re an idiot. U teach stats. God help your students Edited July 25, 2023 by redtail hawk 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 (edited) 37 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Nope. It was 3:1. You’re an idiot. U teach stats. God help your students Are we looking at the same table? The closest ratio is Croatia and they are still above 3:1(less than 40 to more than 150) Seriously where are you pulling your numbers from? Edited July 25, 2023 by Orlando Tim 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said: Are we looking at the same table? The closest ratio is Croatia and they are still above 3:1(less than 40 to more than 150) Seriously where are you pulling your numbers from? Read the actual numbers here https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(23)00023-2/fulltext. They assume serious readers do that before staring at a graph on page 76…and misinterpreting it Edited July 25, 2023 by redtail hawk
Orlando Buffalo Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 Just now, redtail hawk said: Read the actual numbers here https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(23)00023-2/fulltext. They assume serious readers do that before staring at a graph on page 76… Are you telling me the chart is not of the numbers from the report? What are the numbers on the chart from? Your insulting me and then telling me that the charts and raw numbers are not the same. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 (edited) 1 minute ago, Orlando Tim said: Are you telling me the chart is not of the numbers from the report? What are the numbers on the chart from? Your insulting me and then telling me that the charts and raw numbers are not the same. They are the same. You’re digging deeper. Recall that the x axis is different for cold deaths Edited July 25, 2023 by redtail hawk
Orlando Buffalo Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 2 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: They are the same. You’re digging deeper. Recall that the x axis is different for cold deaths I am not digging- the cold deaths in Croatia is listed at more than 150 the hot deaths is less than 40, how the hell is that not greater than 3:1? And that is the smallest ratio. Ireland is more than 150 for cold and looks like 3 for hot, how are you getting a 3:1 ratio overall? 1
Tommy Callahan Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 “There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics” https://venngage.com/blog/misleading-graphs/ is a real basic explanation. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/bio16610w18/chapter/how-graph-misrepresents-data/ "Truncated graph" "This is the most common way of data manipulation. A truncated graph usually involves manipulation of the axis to make something not significant at all look like a huge difference." 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 2 minutes ago, Chris farley said: “There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics” https://venngage.com/blog/misleading-graphs/ is a real basic explanation. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/bio16610w18/chapter/how-graph-misrepresents-data/ "Truncated graph" "This is the most common way of data manipulation. A truncated graph usually involves manipulation of the axis to make something not significant at all look like a huge difference." We already discussed that, but that would require intent and I can't prove that. I am not sure what his point is at this time besides pretending that a table has a purpose beyond helping people look at data quickly. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 32 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said: I am not digging- the cold deaths in Croatia is listed at more than 150 the hot deaths is less than 40, how the hell is that not greater than 3:1? And that is the smallest ratio. Ireland is more than 150 for cold and looks like 3 for hot, how are you getting a 3:1 ratio overall? Did you look at the total raw numbers in the ABSTRACT
B-Man Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 Media beg Republicans to ‘move on’ from Hunter Biden – because they know scandal is serious by Jonathan Turley “I wonder after this plea happens if you would advise your party to move on?” That question from CBS’s “Face the Nation” host Margaret Brennan to Republican presidential candidate Chris Christie was raised just days before a former business associate of Hunter Biden, Devon Archer, gives potentially explosive testimony to a House committee in the Biden corruption scandal. The media’s desire to “move on” from the scandal is reaching an almost frantic level, as millions in foreign payments and dozens of corporate shell companies are revealed, and incriminating emails are released. https://nypost.com/2023/07/24/media-beg-republicans-to-move-on-from-hunter-biden-because-they-know-the-scandal-is-serious/ . 1 1
Recommended Posts