Subject:
|
Re: On the veracity of statistics in general
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 22 Oct 2001 09:28:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
472 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > Even if you are correct. You have produced a report which suggests that one
> > statistic may be wrong. Your argument alleges that the UN systematically
> > produces duff statistics. I’m not clear how you have reached that
> > conclusion. Perhaps you could explain?
>
> Well, it seems obvious to me that if they have produced one study that is
> bogus, that all their work is suspect.
Chris,
1. I think "bogus" is rather strong.
2. We do not know that that stat is duff(?)
3. Even if it is, we need to find where the error is from.
Until then, I shall continue to view Larry's view as nothing more than
convenient:
==+==
I have no faith in statistics that are originated by the UN unless
independently corroborated, and that's a blanket statement. The UN apparatus
is highly politicised and tends to produce answers that are politically
correct rather than actually correct.
==+==
I say convenient as despite his “blanket” rejection of UN data, he is
willing to accept UN data when it suits him.
I am not saying that UN is 100% accurate 100% or the time. But I tend to
give their work more weight than the rather partial opinion Larry gives so
much weight to. He needs to understand that there is more to research than
“googletrolling”. Some thought is also required. I suppose it’s an area
Larry is going to have to spend some time working on. He needs to understand
the distinction between speculation and a well researched argument. I have
observed a tendency for Larry to jump to an opinion, and then go looking for
a basis for it if questioned. When question we normally get some resentment
(who-are-you-to-question-me type responses), then a number of things can happen:
1. He provides backing, and that is fine (It can happen).
2. He provides very weak support from a partial source (common).
3. He does not provide any backing – only bluster (common).
Scott A
>
> Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
26 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
