If anyone is still following or reading @AreoMagazine and specifically @hpluckrose you might want to know that she just blocked me for politely suggesting she read a statistics paper.
-
-
Ah I see. There's also another easy way to prioritise notifs if you're getting too many - I use the mute notifs function from ppl I don't follow/who don't follow me when I get too many
-
Oh yes, I can try that. Honestly, I was mildly interested in what they were saying about causal chains but when it turned out they meant I couldn't say women's choices have an impact on the wage gap, I had to say in that case statistics are of no use here. Cos that does matter.
-
Then other statisticians came in and started telling them they were using an unfalsifiable hypothesis & being intentionally obscurantist & dishonest & also something about a false model. Well, this: https://twitter.com/prshearer/status/1001082821270622208 …
This Tweet is unavailable. -
And this. I've no idea what any of it means but it seems I have stumbled into an argument which makes statisticians very angry & I'm on the side of the ones who aren't rude to me, speak plainly & accept I can talk abt gender issues sans statistical models. https://twitter.com/prshearer/status/1001152411417874433 …
This Tweet is unavailable. -
I think it's not necessary to be knowledgeable in statistics to understand their point about this. It's basically, if we're saying the earnings gap between men and women is 0 when we look at men and women in the same jobs, hours, etc, that doesn't mean there's no discrimination
-
Yes, pointed out early on that statistics were no good for discovering the causes of the imbalance and I said OK and had thread about that so but still needing to talk abt choices so doing it without statistics (tho the likelihood of my doing it with statistics was never high)
-
Nobody said stats are "no good"! We said they are complicated and the simple approach you are championing is not appropriate. You then refused to engage further. This is not a pro-science stance and as the magazine champions science I thought it relevant.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm getting DMs too about how I shouldn't talk about gender issues unless I do so via a particular statistical model which cannot factor in women's choices or disprove discrimination. I so don't want to talk about statistics. I have no qualifications and that's deliberate.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.