Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
1–10 of 22 posts
Re: Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
#2Should follow up on the lack of 2008 PP data. Might show up as an abortion peak...possibly why it has apparently been witheld.
Uh..downmods?
Re: Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
#3There is lies and there is statistics :). For more reading on the subject, I recommend Beautiful Evidence by E. Tufte. He's a classic when it comes to infoviz.
Re: Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
#4The first one was indeed a bad chart, the others simply lying with data. That might as well have been wrong in written text...
Re: Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
#5I would argue the last "good" chart example, a chart of mass-shootings per president, is misleading as it compares four two-term presidents (Obama, W. Bush, Clinton, and Reagan) to a single-term president (H.W. Bush).
Re: Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
#6Should follow up on the lack of 2008 PP data. Might show up as an abortion peak...possibly why it has apparently been witheld. Uh..downmods?
You're saying a missing report, probably the result of miss filing the data, is a malicious attempt to hide some sort of abortion spike in 2008.
If you find sources you might get upvotes, but given the available information it's probably simply missing.
Re: Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
#7I would argue the last "good" chart example, a chart of mass-shootings per president, is misleading as it compares four two-term presidents (Obama, W. Bush, Clinton, and Reagan) to a single-term president (H.W. Bush).
Deleted comment as I was talking about the wrong graph....
Re: Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
#8Should follow up on the lack of 2008 PP data. Might show up as an abortion peak...possibly why it has apparently been witheld. Uh..downmods?
You're saying a missing report, probably the result of miss filing the data, is a malicious attempt to hide some sort of abortion spike in 2008. If you find sources you might get upvotes, but given the available information it's probably simply missing.
Interesting perspective. What harm do you think occurs by 'hiding' such information? (You'll also note that I did not use the word malicious, nor imply its meaning.)
The source of the data would necessarily need to be Planned Parenthood, yet the data for only that particular year is missing.
Anyway, I'm not here for the upvotes; only facts and analysis. It is simply a fact that only the data for 2008 is missing. The onus is on PP to produce either the data or the reason why the data has not yet been produced.
Re: Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're saying a missing report, probably the result of miss filing the data, is a malicious attempt to hide some sort of abortion spike in 2008. If you find sources you might get upvotes, but given the available information it's probably simply missing.
Interesting perspective. What harm do you think occurs by 'hiding' such information? (You'll also note that I did not use the word malicious , nor imply its meaning.) The source of the data would necessarily need to be Planned Parenthood, yet the data for only that particular year is missing. Anyway, I'm not here for the upvotes; only facts and analysis. It is simply a fact that only the data for 2008 is missing. The…
You explicitly said the data was withheld (not missing), and theorized that it was to hide a spike in abortions. You follow it up by explaining that the missing data in the chart must be missing because PP didn't provide it.
Re: Misleading charts of 2015, fixed
#10So this complains about not including the 0 on the y-axis but then complains about it in the national review global temp chart.
If you have an agenda it will show through, regardless of what you do. Both graphs accurately portray the data, but most of the public doesn't care to interpret graphs objectively.