8 ms·
Your first point is misaimed. They don't just note the historical worldwide rise in refrigeration goes along side a worldwide rise in Chrohn's. They compare the
by jessriedel 5y ago
Your first point is misaimed. They don't just note the historical worldwide rise in refrigeration goes along side a worldwide rise in Chrohn's. They compare the timing for Chrohn's and refrigeration for different demographic groups in different countries and even, if I am reading this correctly, at the level of individuals. The other things you list will not vary in the same way at that level of detail, although one must of course be wary of multiple hypothesis testing, forking paths, etc.
- tomrod 5y ago> although one must of course be wary of multiple hypothesis testing, forking paths, etc. Precisely. My point was in agreement with another on the article: correlation may not be causation, but it can be highly suggestive of it as one drills down. Necessary, but not sufficient, conditions.
- epgui 5y agoSuggesting that there may be a causal link is entirely appropriate. It's a hypothesis, not a proof.
- tomrod 5y agoCorrect.
- Dylan16807 5y agoThe issue is your point was also long, mocking, and unnecessary.
- tomrod 5y agoRespectfully, I disagree with your assertions.
- Dylan16807 5y agoAll of them? You don't even agree it was mocking? And I'm pretty sure people know that correlation isn't the same as causation. I won't argue very hard for 'long'; the gratuitous examples weren't a big deal in isolation.
- tomrod 5y ago> You don't even agree it was mocking? Correct. Can you help me understand what verbiage you felt was mocking?
- Dylan16807 5y agoSaying it's a bad title and immediately launching into a list of absolutely silly correlations.
- tomrod 5y agoWhen the article was initially posted, it was "Correlation between the advent of refrigeration and the rise of Crohn's disease."[0] Now that the title has been improved by dang/admins, I can understand and appreciate your confusion and misinterpretation. Mocking was not intended. Thanks for your feedback. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20211206002300/https://news.ycombinator.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20211206002300/https://news.ycom...
- Dylan16807 5y agoI posted when it still had that title. I don't know how to interpret this other than "I was mocking the bad title, but now it has been replaced with an acceptable title"? I don't think that's what you mean, but I can't figure out why else you're talking about the title change that way.
- jessriedel 5y agoYou were mischaracterizing the strength of their argument and only rebutting that straw man.