|
|
|
I was flipping through channels yesterday and on my city's public broadcast channel, there was a lady doing an investigative report on incest and sexual abuse within families. I watched for about 3 seconds when I saw an alarming pie chart come up accompanied by her saying that "99% of all incest cases occur within the family." the pie chart was entirely blue with a small orange slice saying "1% other"
So, I hereby dedicate this thread to the stupid people we see every day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
My mom once told me about somebody who got pulled over in our subdivision for running a stop sign. Her excuse? She thought that stop signs only applied to people who don't live in the subdivision.
|
|
wat
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, amazingly brilliant deduction. I really do wonder what the other 1% could possibly be in their minds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know, statistics have shown that 89.2% of all statistics are made-up on the spot.
|
|
wat
|
|
|
|
|
You know, statistics have shown that 89.2% of all statistics are made-up on the spot. Including that one?
|
|
|
|
|
You know, statistics have shown that 89.2% of all statistics are made-up on the spot. Including that one? Only if he said 89.3%. I mentioned this to Josh on MSN, but this reminds me of something we did in class.  In a matter of about 30 seconds we debunked "one of the most scientific reports ever" by the U of Chicago with pure logic. I won't go into details, because it'd take too long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Only if he said 89.3%. I mentioned this to Josh on MSN, but this reminds me of something we did in class. In a matter of about 30 seconds we debunked "one of the most scientific reports ever" by the U of Chicago with pure logic. I won't go into details, because it'd take too long. You did it in 30 seconds, how long could it take? Also, are you talking about the june baby anorexia thing or something?
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm definitely curious.
Esplain, Chris.
|
|
|
|
|
Only if he said 89.3%. I mentioned this to Josh on MSN, but this reminds me of something we did in class. In a matter of about 30 seconds we debunked "one of the most scientific reports ever" by the U of Chicago with pure logic. I won't go into details, because it'd take too long. You did it in 30 seconds, how long could it take? Also, are you talking about the june baby anorexia thing or something? They disproved something on the study of who has more opposite sex partners: men or women. They debunked it using really simple logic, too. Only problem is that their logic doesn't take into account a man or woman being faithful while the significant other is cheating. Unless I am mistaken, that should skew it one way or the other.
|
|
|
|
|
courses.csail.mit.edu/6.042/fall10/mcs-ftl.pdf5.2.1. We debug it in the course notes as well there. Read if you're really that curious. Josh: Wrong. That man must sleep with another woman, thus that woman also adds to the woman count while the men add too. It's actually really basic graph theory. *shrugs* Edit: Similar issue summed up very well: (Quoted from that book above.) Edit 2: BTW, my bad on attributing "most scientific study ever" to the wrong source. It was ABC News not U of chicago.
Last Edit: Oct 27, 2010 20:44:21 GMT by Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
courses.csail.mit.edu/6.042/fall10/mcs-ftl.pdf5.2.1. We debug it in the course notes as well there. Read if you're really that curious. Josh: Wrong. That man must sleep with another woman, thus that woman also adds to the woman count while the men add too. It's actually really basic graph theory. *shrugs* Edit: Similar issue summed up very well: (Quoted from that book above.) Edit 2: BTW, my bad on attributing "most scientific study ever" to the wrong source. It was ABC News not U of chicago. Yep. Just ran it through my head again and you are right.
|
|
|
|
|
Haven't read up on graph theory, but can't it be done like this: Men Having Hetero Sex: 2.5 bil (no idea on actual numbers) Women Having Hetero Sex: 2.5 bil Men's Encounters: 17.5 bil Women's Encounter: 17.5 bil A man is reported as having sex with 40 women, and men's encounters are: Men's Encounters: 17.5 bil + 40 That also means 40 women had sex with 1 more man, so: Women's Encounters: 17.5bil + 1 * 40 So it always balances out? Edit: Just thought I'd add that I know that the population won't be even, so if there is a difference in averages, it is due to only the population and not the sum of the encounters.
Last Edit: Oct 27, 2010 21:20:40 GMT by Eric
|
|
|
|
|
Eric: Pretty much right.  Yeah the averages vary slightly according to population, but either way, that still clearly disproves the "accurate" study.
|
|
|
|
|
