Subject:
|
Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2001 20:31:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
716 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> I am only asking what his source/s of a statistic is.
Below this line, you quote his stating that it was a hunch. What the hell more
do you want from him. He stated clearly that it was just a hunch.
> is that simple. If it was a guess, why did he not just say that? Why concoct
> some asinine story rather than say “I guess” or “I assume”. Like you say,
> the fact is obvious - we would all have accepted it without question.
> Instead we get:
What the F are you talking about? What asinine story? Read the quote of him
that _you_ chose to include:
> “When you challenged me I went off and counted noses at that point in order
> to see if my hunch was right. It was, at least for the 20+ fests, meetings,
> events, etc., I've attended in 6 countries on 3 continents... (a slightly
> better sample set than yours) For the subset that I reviewed pictures, each
> one ofthem was more male than 49% and more white than the population average
> for the continent or the country or the state that it was held in.
> (whichever is a good metric)”
> Descibing that as a "guess" or a "hunch" *is* absurd!
What the hell are you talking about? He reported an obviously vague statistic
that was clearly from his own annecdotal evidence. Then, he stated that it was
a hunch. After you were hassling him about it (for God only knows whatever
reason...I've read your notes and it's clear as mud to me) he got to wondering
and checked the data that he had collected to see if his hunch was corroborated
by the data. It was.
Either I'm just not getting something, or you're not getting something and I
can't figure out what you're not getting.
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
| (...) It is the source of the collberation data I am taliking about. I have said this so may times, I fail to see how you could have missed this. Anyhow, I am actually fed up with all this now as it is clear to me that Larry is unwilling to justify (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
| (...) Because it is laden with paranoia. (...) Now you are being obtuse Chris. The stats you mentioned are derived objectively. If, as you say, Larry did guess his stats, I would describe that as subjective. (...) You are being absurd. You need to (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
67 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
