I maintain my position that you are, and were over-generalizing, and stereotyping individuals, based on pseudo-scientific aggregation and averaging of self-reported narrow instruments, with the added problems surveys have of sampling and selection bias.
Rabbit the analogy used the spectrum of light as an example for the fallacy.
I didn’t say anyone had commited the fallacy. I said it’s was a good analogy for it. So if anyone wanted the ecological fallacy explained to them. You could use that analogy as teaching guide.
Gordon teaches people… It’s probably why he has good analogies.
You are making incorrect inferences… and bullshitting to sound smart… it has the opposite effect to me.
1 Like
You, Sir, are an enabler
I don’t think you’re first in the world anymore for vaccine uptake. I believe the UAE is.
That’s fightin’ talk round here, boi!
I don’t have to sound smart, it hits all by itself.
I also teach people. So here’s another free lesson in logical induction.
Shitty analogies often lead to inference errors like yours, where you accidentally chose the wrong fallacy to describe that 2D graph being discussed.
Bad example, by way of bad analogy about actual empirical data that was posted.
You’re welcome, again.
Rabbit go touch grass
I can’t right now, I’m in the middle of Newbury Street in Boston.
Inside Newbury Comics #1 to be precise.
I’ve been known to pour a drink, or fill people up, with vittles, from time to time.
Fay-Do-Do!
Formal fallacies have to be in the form of deduction.
So, one or more of the premises have to be incorrect.
You are an example of what not to do.
Kind of like Goofus, from the Highlights magazine.
Yes, and provably so.
This is what all inferences and forms of theoretical induction are prone to error without significant empirical grounding and constant comparative feedback.
Even better when triangulation is utilized, which I think Bullshido consensus usually does a good job of.
Usually.
Incorrect. He retreats to pedantry quite often when called out on his bullshit.
2 Likes
Someone has to. Otherwise there would be goofy errors all over the place and we couldn’t have nice things.
Are you asking me to stop being pedantic? I’m not sure that’s possible on the internet.
You are apparently unable to understand an actual data scientist explaining why your data isn’t necessarily accurate. When he took the time to give you a specific explanation, your counter argument is, “No it’s not!”?
snicker
I’m just waiting on you to report one more post.
You see the new sticky in Gen BS? It was written especially for one member.
Guess who?
May I also say that I am only over generalising about 109 self serving politicians and I’m probably right about those bastads
2 Likes
The data scientist, clearly.
I mean, is there another way to deal with people who fill up the thread after thread with personal rants about other members of the site?
Spank that ass.
That’s a lot of masks.