Subject:
|
Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Oct 2001 16:47:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
233 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> If you think the UN stats lack rigour. Show us.
I did. Go to the top of the thread and *read* the article I cited.
UN stats for landmines are an order of magnitude different than the numbers
that a professional in the field of mine clearing (and who therefore would
presumably want lots of work) came up with. That suggests that for that
particular statistic, there wasn't a lot of rigor behind it.
> Its time to put-up or shut-up.
I put up, you just didn't read it very carefully.
You should shut up, because a lot of people here (not just me) are tired of
putting up with YOU.
Go reread Dave's DebateCard(tm) and think about what it means.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
| (...) I have not read it yet. You said you found it yesterday. What was your basis before then? When you said (04.10.01): "I have no faith in statistics that are originated by the UN unless independently corroborated, and that's a blanket (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
| (...) Did I say that? (...) Did I say that? You are putting words in my mouth again! My point was that the fact that they are not just accepting raw data from the countries mentioned, but are processing the data in some way, suggests to me there is (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
26 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
|
|
|
|
