Oh look, gold and platinum are also rallying with silver. I wonder why.
-
-
Replying to @nope_its_lily
Do you think it might be because {gold, silver, platinum, palladium} are *always* correlated with each other on account of being driven by very similar macro factors? It would be a much bigger story if they were moving in opposite directions.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @macrocephalopod @nope_its_lily
Gold was up on 82% of days that silver was up over the last ten years. Platinum up on 74% of days that silver was up, palladium up on 70% of days that silver was up. This is not "memetics" it is plain boring old correlation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @macrocephalopod
Err calling it a correlation doesn’t explain any causal factors of why they correlate. In this case do you think macro factors drove gold and platinum?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @macrocephalopod @nope_its_lily
My point is that observing something that occurs on 80% of days and calling that evidence for your theory is a pretty egregious example of confirmation bias.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @macrocephalopod
Uh, sure. I provided other examples pretty recently occurring that seem to support the semantic network effect. It’s just this one tended to be easily predictable via it too. There’s no real way to falsify this theory as it is anyway so there’s no real satisfactory proof.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nope_its_lily
Do you not think it’s a bit of a problem to have a theory which is not falsifiable?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Like, you could literally be saying anything and there is no way to confirm whether it is right or wrong! Come on, you are a scientist, you understand this shit!
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.