Yeah, that was ridiculous. I am making such a statistically basic point that it's painful. But the error is common.
-
-
I agree with you that this stat is not conclusive, as I said. I also think Duke's rise is serious, should be discussed.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @sarahkendzior @Chanders
Feel free to discuss Duke, of course. But this "stat" is not what you say it is. BOTH numbers are effectively zero.
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
It's worth asking about nature of that support. Which is why question should be examined w/ 1) better data 2) qual data
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sarahkendzior @Chanders
You compared tiny subgroups. You cannot. Those numbers are statistically equal to zero. You won't listen to me.
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
Acquire a friend who has taken one semester of intro to stats. I think I repeated very basic point enough times.
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
You've literally lectured with me, engaged with and RTed my work, worked with my cowriters, and you claim this? Hmm.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @sarahkendzior @Chanders
I even cite that work with your co-writers. Ask your co-writer, our mutual friend.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I've no idea why you don't say, oh, okay, margin of error to zero, true, shouldn't have made that comparison. Done.
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.