4 ms·
That's a very astute observation, one that I've personally seen overlooked several times by people using that data point to support their argument. That kind of
by felix_n 5y ago
That's a very astute observation, one that I've personally seen overlooked several times by people using that data point to support their argument. That kind of statistical begging-the-question annoys me to no end.
The number I've heard from people who quote it is all over the map, sometimes it's 10%, or 20%, even as high as 50%, but I've not once seen a citation of any of them. So I'm inclined to treat that statistic as BS unless proven otherwise. But as you say, even a legit number is probably misleading due to the circumstances surrounding the data gathering.
- astura 5y ago>but I've not once seen a citation of any of them I have, which is why I brought it up. Any time people throw out such absurdly high numbers and provide "evidence" there always is "...seeking paternity testing..." in the methodology. Always. It's absurd how people could overlook this, it's like if you counted the times Maury Povich says "you are not the father" and used it to say anything about the general population.