The stark reality

Bartikus wrote:

It is not I to whom it is encumbered to provide said definitions.

Bartikus wrote:

Where did I require you or anyone else to provide a definition for reliability?

i stand corrected. you asked for a definition of 'reliable source'. seems to me that a reliable source would by definition have reliability, so it seems hardly possible to define 'reliable source' without a definition of reliability, but if that is not the case, kindly explain the flaw in my reasoning.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Since I didn't respond to yitwails:
"CI, i don't need statistics to demonstrate that wealth & opportunity aren't distributed equally across the world."

Do you really think most of us do?

Another valid point.

Then again...that was not the reason for the post.

Most of us don't need the statistics to know the truth.....however, sometimes some of us...may need to be reminded of it from time to time is all.

That was the point.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Since I didn't respond to yitwails:
"CI, i don't need statistics to demonstrate that wealth & opportunity aren't distributed equally across the world."

Do you really think most of us do?

i haven't given it much thought. when i first wrote that, i thought some people in this thread were insinuating that i was among those who required statistical proof of inequality. that's why i said "i don't need statistics, etc." i wasn't commenting about anyone else.

0 Replies

yitwail wrote:

Bartikus wrote:
It is not I to whom it is encumbered to provide said definitions.

Bartikus wrote:
Where did I require you or anyone else to provide a definition for reliability?

i stand corrected. you asked for a definition of 'reliable source'. seems to me that a reliable source would by definition have reliability, so it seems hardly possible to define 'reliable source' without a definition of reliability, but if that is not the case, kindly explain the flaw in my reasoning.

Not that this was even the original point of my post but here goes.

re·li·a·ble

adjective
Definition:

1. dependable: able to be trusted to do what is expected or has been promised
She is extremely reliable and a hard worker.

2. likely to be accurate: able to be trusted to be accurate or to provide a correct result

You still want reliable stats from reliable sources yitwail?

0 Replies

thank you, that's most helpful. so here's a definition of reliable source:

a source likely to be accurate: a source able to be trusted to be accurate.

and yes, i prefer reliable sources, where available, or at the very least, a plausibly reliable source to one that is demonstrably unreliable.

0 Replies

Which statistics do you not find accurate/reliable yitwail?

Why? I only ask to avoid your objection in the future.

0 Replies

there will be no objection from me in the future. i am foresaking this thread, and thank everyone who responded to what i wrote.

0 Replies

I'm not surprised nor can I say I blame you.

Your most welcome yitwail and thank you for your postings.

0 Replies

Thanks Bartikus. Sometimes it is good to be reminded of what we have to be grateful for.
It's very easy to forget.

Smile

I happen to like posts like these.

0 Replies

flushd wrote:

Thanks Bartikus. Sometimes it is good to be reminded of what we have to be grateful for.
It's very easy to forget.

I happen to like posts like these.

I have a friend who is going blind. He's 29.

How often do you think the average person even gives a second thought about being able to see? I never did before..... till lately.

I'm gonna stop because.....even though i'm grateful. It's all kinda depressing as well. I can kinda understand getting both positive and negative responses from this thread.

Thanks flushd.

0 Replies

Sometimes I'm grateful sometimes I'm ungrateful and pissed and sometimes I don't know how I should feel.

Fuk it.

0 Replies

and that, Barticus, it what is known as standard deviation. <smile>

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Letty wrote:
Well, snood, when laconic Letty needs some cognitive insight, that's when.<smile> I took statistics in grad school and made an A and understood very little, but I do know that Mr. Turtle has a right to cite, methinks.

I'm taking Statistics in grad school right now, Letty! What a co-inky-dink!

Just had my mid term Friday - made a 98%! (Don't ask me what the hell it was about - a whole lot of means, medians, Z-scores and standard deviations that signify not much)

Did you know that 57% of publicly cited statistics are made up on the spot?

0 Replies

snood, You forgot the "bell curve," a common term in statistics. Wink

0 Replies

Exactly, C.I. I had forgotten that. I don't think that I ever had a class that was normal. Hee Hee!

http://classes.kumc.edu/sah/resources/sensory_processing/images/bell_curve.gif

0 Replies

Actually, statistics is commonly used in social studies and other research that has to do with finding/seeking the best solutions to problems. With so many variables inherent in any "study," it's not a simple problem solving technique/tool.

0 Replies

Bartikus, I'm sorry to hear about your friend.
He is very close to my age.

Take care.

....

Maybe I am dumb, but can someone tell me what the Bell Curve has to do with this topic? Or is that just a brief sideroad into Stats? Smile

thx.

0 Replies

Thanks flushd.

I'm apparently dumb when it comes to Bell curve's, standard deviations, etc. also.

I am so grateful we have smart people to inform us about these interesting terms. The list of things to be grateful for just keeps growing.....

(just a little sarcastic humor) :wink: Meant that in a lighthearted way.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

snood, You forgot the "bell curve," a common term in statistics.

Also know as the Standard normal distribution.

0 Replies

I studied statistics about 40 years ago; also earned an "A." Wink

0 Replies

The stark reality

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know