Beware of statisics, they can be very misleading

[Tonington]

Too often they are altered to suit conditions and that's why they are often an un-reliable source of true information.

Needs context. I don't often see stats that are altered to suit conditions, though my experience is largely with science, and the statistics are mostly done correctly due to reviewers and editors proof reading manuscripts.

I think it depends a great deal on where those stats come from. Though even the peer review process is not perfect.

In this thread, I don't see how what was said on the news broadcast was unreliable, though I do see plenty of red herrings.

If someone wants to move to Calgary or Edmonton to look for work, they might want to know that it is no longer the exceptional job market that prevailed in years past. Maybe they put the move off until the job market rebounds. That's a good use of a statistic don't you think? If it allows someone to make an informed decision?

 

[AnnaG]

Stats are not crap. If you're studying anything, and you make measurements, how do you know that one quantity is really larger than the other? How do you know it wasn't impacted by some unaccounted variable. Next time you measure that same parameter, it could be different.

Stats are crap when the methods and assumptions are crap. When the methods and assumptions are correct, statistics is immensely powerful. Manufacturers use stats to improve their processes. Scientists use stats to test hypotheses and to determine optimal treatments.

The edge Japanese automakers held over domestic for such a long time is due to stats. They require less variability in the parts and manufacture of their vehicles, and thus the product quality is better. This idea was pitched to North American automakers first, but they didn't go for it. Japanese manufacturers (not just cars) embraced this idea, and the result is high quality products.

Stats are definitely not crap.

Egg Zackary.

 

[AnnaG]

People in most cases that assume stats are twisted to bring about a manufactured result are simply too lazy to inspect what the data really says. Another part is that some of the statistical information is omitted.
If all the available data is collected and the parameters and margins of error are stated correctly, stats are immensely truthful and beneficial.

 

[VanIsle]

Needs context. I don't often see stats that are altered to suit conditions, though my experience is largely with science, and the statistics are mostly done correctly due to reviewers and editors proof reading manuscripts.

I think it depends a great deal on where those stats come from. Though even the peer review process is not perfect.

In this thread, I don't see how what was said on the news broadcast was unreliable, though I do see plenty of red herrings.

If someone wants to move to Calgary or Edmonton to look for work, they might want to know that it is no longer the exceptional job market that prevailed in years past. Maybe they put the move off until the job market rebounds. That's a good use of a statistic don't you think? If it allows someone to make an informed decision?

agreed

 

[VanIsle]

People in most cases that assume stats are twisted to bring about a manufactured result are simply too lazy to inspect what the data really says. Another part is that some of the statistical information is omitted.
If all the available data is collected and the parameters and margins of error are stated correctly, stats are immensely truthful and beneficial.

Lazy has nothing to do with it. I know for a fact that stats are altered when the result of the true stats is not within the acceptable guidelines of what the public wants to hear. You cannot inspect data in particular unless you have access to all the information - not just the information made public. Some statistical information is often purposely left out and if you don't know that - I've got a bridge to sell to you.8O

 

[AnnaG]

Lazy has nothing to do with it. I know for a fact that stats are altered when the result of the true stats is not within the acceptable guidelines of what the public wants to hear. You cannot inspect data in particular unless you have access to all the information - not just the information made public. Some statistical information is often purposely left out and if you don't know that - I've got a bridge to sell to you.8O

Nope. Even the data that spinners produce says stuff. It is usually not what they say it means, but it definitely says stuff.

Like that gum commercial where some guy says 4 out of 5 dentists recommend Trident for their patients who chew gum. In actuality, the study showed that 1200 dentists were asked whether dentists should recommend sugarless, sugary, or no gum at all. 85% said sugarless should be recommended.

 

[TenPenny]

Lazy has nothing to do with it. I know for a fact that stats are altered when the result of the true stats is not within the acceptable guidelines of what the public wants to hear. You cannot inspect data in particular unless you have access to all the information - not just the information made public. Some statistical information is often purposely left out and if you don't know that - I've got a bridge to sell to you.8O

It's not that the stats are altered, it's that you have to look carefully at what they say. Which isn't necessarily what someone claims they say.

 

[JLM]

"that" was the foundation of your premise.

Okay, I'll give you a little there, I sure thought it was in 2008 when the decline started, guess time flies when you are old. I still stand by what I say re statistics that use percentages, not that they couldn't useful if made perfectly clear and understood by everyone. But one little hint, Gerry - just because you think someone is mistaken doesn't mean you have to jump all over them and use profanity. I'm the greatest listener in the world provide the person disagreeing gives me a reason to want to listen, otherwise I can easier adopt the same attitude and say "F**k him too.

 

[gerryh]

so...what are you saying, that if I hadn't used an explitive in my first post it wouldn't have taken you 6 pages to admit you were wrong in your opening OP?

 

[TenPenny]

On the other hand, 75% of people surveyed prefer mashed potatoes.

 

[TenPenny]

The best email exchange I seen in days. Or hours, anyway.

"It's like twitter. Except we charge people to use it."

 

[Nuggler]

There's lies
There's damn lies
Then, there's statistics.

......wish I had said that.

 

[karrie]

so...what are you saying, that if I hadn't used an explitive in my first post it wouldn't have taken you 6 pages to admit you were wrong in your opening OP?

I know I'm less inclined to discuss once someone gets abusive.

 

[JLM]

so...what are you saying, that if I hadn't used an explitive in my first post it wouldn't have taken you 6 pages to admit you were wrong in your opening OP?

It wasn't using the expletive that changed my mind, it was more like settling down to present your point in a civil manner. My first rule of life is there is an exception to every rule, my ability to make mistakes being one of them, but jumping on me like a ton of bricks isn't going to get you anywhere. "I beg to differ" or "let's agree to disagree" is more like it. - NOT F**K OFF MORON.