4 ms·
It isn't misleading! You're the one being misleading by claiming we need to cook the data to come up with the result you want to have instead of the reality of
by flyinRyan 14y ago
It isn't misleading! You're the one being misleading by claiming we need to cook the data to come up with the result you want to have instead of the reality of the situation.
- w1ntermute 14y agoI'm not suggesting we "cook the data", I'm suggesting that we shouldn't boil the data down to one statistic just so that we can get a number that conveniently agrees with our worldview. See my comment here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4932547 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4932547
- flyinRyan 14y ago>I'm suggesting that we shouldn't boil the data down to one statistic just so that we can get a number that conveniently agrees with our worldview. Ironically, this is exactly what you're suggesting. Word for word.
- w1ntermute 14y agoWrong again. That's what you are doing. You're taking the number of firearm homicides per capita in the US (one number) and just comparing it to that in other countries.
- Gormo 14y agoHe isn't "cooking the data". Or, more accurately, he's the one who isn't cooking the all of the data in one big pot, without regard for whether all of the data are actually describing the same thing. The point he's making is that there are qualitative distinctions within the data that demand their own discrete analysis. What's misleading here is ignoring distinctions in the data in order to falsely posit a uniform source of causality.