Stefan MolyneuxVerified account

>claiming correlation is causation

Actually he's citing factual statistics as evidence to support his argument.

the stats being true doesnt imply causation.

Unless there is another explanation for the trend (such as one thing that effected both variables) then you can assume causation. People use “correlation =/= causation” to avoid arguments.

So you can just assume there is no other explanation for the trend just because you dont immediately see one? no, you have to seek to rule out all other explanations before you can assume causation

The problem with your current argument is that you expect Molyneux to post an entire thesis on Twitter when he explains himself on various platforms, even literature. Trying to prove it wrong while posting 0 evidence and mere speculation, means less than posting 1 evidence.

maybe he should post links to his theses rather than posting loose correlations then? youre implying burden of proof is not on the claimant

He has links to these on his websites and other platforms. You can't just argue that he needs to prove more than you need to disprove. You have no argument anymore.

In the United States 1920 and we have been going down hill ever since coincidence I think not

You could test this theory by finding out what happened in Switzerland-where women got the vote in 1971