21–30 of 248 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Often, you can discover such things by reading the article.
Often, but not in this case, hence my comment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its so so clearly a joke. Come on man.
What's the joke? It seems to me they're trying to make a point about the study that appears lower on the page, the one claiming that vaccinated people are dying at a higher rate than unvaccinated.
The study at the bottom shows that vaccinated people are dying at a higher rate than unvaccinated people. The joke is on the person who concludes that the increase in death rate is because of the vaccine and not the age difference.
The introduction to the article needs more context. I don’t understand why it exists, who cares about it and who would believe that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its so so clearly a joke. Come on man.
What's the joke? It seems to me they're trying to make a point about the study that appears lower on the page, the one claiming that vaccinated people are dying at a higher rate than unvaccinated.
[0] https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/what-do-uk-data-say-a...
This reminds me of the sort of light poking of common "correlation is not the same as causation" and "beware of confounding factors" statistical failures behind the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster "clearly reduction in pirates has caused global warming!" [0]. But it's a major in modern public discourse, and one for once that I'm quite willing to lay heavily at the feet of the public education system. Easily on…
This reminds me of the sort of light poking of common "correlation is not the same as causation" and "beware of confounding factors" statistical failures behind the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster "clearly reduction in pirates has caused global warming!" [0]. But it's a major in modern public discourse, and one for once that I'm quite willing to lay heavily at the feet of the public education system. Easily on…
People intentionally or repeatedly inadvertently publishing BS should be called out and their opinions down-weighted heavily.
People having a good BS filter is one step in the chain towards this down-weighting, but isn’t the whole chain. If anything, people slinging BS today are likely to gain additional reach and opinion-weight, rather than to lose it.
Nice example of 'correlation does not imply causation' and if you submit this kinda thing to me in my data analysis class I'll fail you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the joke? It seems to me they're trying to make a point about the study that appears lower on the page, the one claiming that vaccinated people are dying at a higher rate than unvaccinated.
It is a joke as the author states in a more recent article[0] [0] https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/what-do-uk-data-say-a...