You should really read Chip's paper.
-
-
No, you're just wrong. Poorly ran descriptives is proof that the person needs to pick up J Scott Long's books.
-
How were the descriptives 'poorly run'? Every way single way the data was analyzed produced the same result (despite your unsubstantiated claim that the results you obtained drastically differed).
-
More importantly, how does this detract from the bottom line? The data either show X or they don't. Engaging in ad hominems doesn't change this.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Wrong again. You're confusing means/descriptives, with formal hypothesis tests. This is basic stats.
-
Huh? A test of the hypothesis here (that whites uniquely overestimate the black pop.) only requires an examination of group means. I can't help but feel you're trolling.
-
You tested nothing. This is basic stats.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
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.