I'll most likely be rebuffed by someone much more knowledgeable on the subject
of Statistics than I am, but Statistics can show pretty much what you want them to
show depending on the parameters set out to display the information.
The whole Climate thing I'm not going to touch, so lets use crime as an example.
Crime rates have been dropping for a long time....everywhere, it seems. Hmmm..
Antidotally, my Father or any of his Friends 30+ years ago never had their cars
broken into or stolen. I'm sure it happened, but not to anyone they knew. Now here
I am and I'm not sure if I know anyone personally that hasn't had a car broken into
or stolen in the last five years (& I'm leaving the never or ever out of this now).
Similar story with B&E's of peoples homes (& many where not locked much of the
time) back 30+ years ago. If you heard of it, it was a rare occurrence. Now I'm hard
pressed to think of anyone I know personally that hasn't had a B&E (or an attempt
was made on their homes) in the last 5-10 years....and so on & so forth. The crime
rate has been dropping for years though according to the statistics. What's going
on?
Can statistics be manipulated based on a predetermined concept (I'm NOT talk'n
about the climate) by setting up the parameters governing the display of the stats to
reflect what someone wants them to reflect?
Oh yeah, statistics are very reliable and accurate. Ok, what am I talking about? :lol:How reliable are they at telling the whole story?
How reliable are they at telling the whole story?
Telling the whole story?
Zero reliability.
Statistics can show an accurate view towards one particular aspect of a much bigger picture, but almost always, statistics do not account for every needed factor, or bring about an assumption of something unfounded based on the information provided that with an additional factor applied, could bring about a totally different result.
It might show information leans towards one particular thing, but does it explain how it got there, why people decided on something, why something is the way it is in its entirety, the background or the reasons someone or something came to such a conclusion?
Never in its entirety.
Statistics are good for giving a limited perspective on a subject and perhaps point people in the right direction in regards to gaining further and more detailed information on said subject, but one should never rely on a statistic as being 100% true or that it tells a story/situation in its entirety.
Besides, 87.62% of all statistics are made up on the spot ;-)
Statistics can show an accurate view towards one particular aspect of a much bigger picture, but almost always, statistics do not account for every needed factor
It might show information leans towards one particular thing, but does it explain how it got there, why people decided on something, why something is the way it is in its entirety, the background or the reasons someone or something came to such a conclusion?
Statistics are good for giving a limited perspective on a subject and perhaps point people in the right direction in regards to gaining further and more detailed information on said subject, but one should never rely on a statistic as being 100% true or that it tells a story/situation in its entirety.
Mark Twain said: "There are lies. There are damned lies. And then, there are statistics".
One poster gave a good example of the fallibility of statistics, in that for crime statistics, not all the information is entered because not all of it is even reported.
... and the description of what the stats are supposed to show.Statistics are only as good as the quality of the data. Caveat.
Interesting thing in BC lately: someone did a study on the public's view of the RCMP and found about only 35% of the public had confidence in the RCMP here. I can imagine that this stat would cause a few people to just suffer minor crimes and keep clam about them rather than reporting them. That could cause a lowering of crime stats and reporting. Ironic, huh?But now here's a pickle for you. Do you think that this non-reporting of crime is a new phenomenon, or something that has always been there? If so, showing a decreasing trend in crime rates is very likely to be a robust result. If not, then the statistics which show that this is a new phenomenon lead to investigations, which can find ways of addressing the problem.
... and the description of what the stats are supposed to show.
Interesting thing in BC lately: someone did a study on the public's view of the RCMP and found about only 35% of the public had confidence in the RCMP here. I can imagine that this stat would cause a few people to just suffer minor crimes and keep clam about them rather than reporting them. That could cause a lowering of crime stats and reporting. Ironic, huh?