OK, I just woke up to news that there has been ANOTHER mass shooting in the US, this time in Dayton Ohio... 9 dead, 16 injured

[Goukosan 2,255]

2 hours ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Polls don't have any weight

 

2 hours ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Of course it was trolling you moron. 

[jehurey 3,230]

And after I post the manifesto (that they've been trying to argue that he actually doesn't align fully with Trump/Fox News ideology), Dynocrap tries to change the argument right in the middle and say "well, those things are true!!!!!!"

 

[Wife]: Have you been seeing another woman?

 

[Husband]: What? What are you talking about, that's ridiculous. Where do you even get something like that?

 

[Wife]: I just got a call from the guy at the dry cleaner that said that they are unable to get the lipstick and perfume off of your clothing that you dropped off last night

 

[Husband]: Well DUH.....lipstick IS hard to get rid of, stupid! Why can't you understand that?

Edited August 6, 2019 by jehurey

[jehurey 3,230]

2 minutes ago, Goukosan said:

 

Yeah, in an act of desperation..............he said "well, of course make shit up" thinking that would help his case out.

[Hot Sauce 2,729]

2 hours ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Even if you ran it 20 times a subsequent 20 times would turn up a different result and so on and so forth.

If you flipped a coin 20 times and another 20 times you would (likely) get a different result. That's just how probability works. The result would be within an expected range, though, and the more coin flips the tighter that range on the 50/50 split you would expect. Do you think you'd have much benefit in determining the ratio of heads to tails if you flipped a coin 350 million times instead of 1000 times?

 

2 hours ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I attribute the fault to the ignorant assumption that you can achieve objectively accurate results

Nobody is calling probability or polling objectively accurate. That's kind of implied by the whole margin of error thing. It's just a baseline wherein significant deviations are less and less likely the further away you go.

 

A poll that says 50% of Americans pick their nose doesn't mean 50% of Americans pick their nose, it means you can reasonably expect that 50% of Americans pick their nose give or take the margin of error. Could only 10% of Americans pick their nose? Of course. Probability doesn't guarantee anything. You could flip a coin 1,000 times and have it come up heads 900 times. Is it likely? No.

 

2 hours ago, DynamiteCop! said:

by targeting any widely spaced demographic. 

It's a yes/no/maybe question. You're overthinking the differences that people have and not giving Gallup the credit they deserve.

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

3 minutes ago, Hot Sauce said:

If you flipped a coin 20 times and another 20 times you would (likely) get a different result. That's just how probability works. The result would be within an expected range, though, and the more coin flips the tighter that range on the 50/50 split you would expect. Do you think you'd have much benefit in determining the ratio of heads to tails if you flipped a coin 350 million times instead of 1000 times?

 

Nobody is calling probability or polling objectively accurate. That's kind of implied by the whole margin of error thing. It's just a baseline wherein significant deviations are less and less likely the further away you go.

 

A poll that says 50% of Americans pick their nose doesn't mean 50% of Americans pick their nose, it means you can reasonably expect that 50% of Americans pick their nose give or take the margin of error. Could only 10% of Americans pick their nose? Of course. Probability doesn't guarantee anything. You could flip a coin 1,000 times and have it come up heads 900 times. Is it likely? No.

 

It's a yes/no/maybe question. You're overthinking the differences that people have and not giving Gallup the credit they deserve.

It's a baseline rooted in situational chance, that's not valuable no matter how much it's perpetuated. 

 

Polls are great for agenda's and trying to make a point, they're terrible for what actually aligns with reality. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by DynamiteCop!

[jehurey 3,230]

Just now, DynamiteCop! said:

It's a baseline rooted in situational chance, that's not valuable no matter how much it's perpetuated. 

what, exactly, is the "situational chance"

 

That the pollster found a person to ask the question to?

 

What are you even saying? LOL

[Hot Sauce 2,729]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

It's a baseline rooted in situational chance, that's not valuable no matter how much it's perpetuated. 

 

Polls are great for agenda's and trying to make a point, they're terrible for what actually aligns with reality. 

You're entitled to believe whatever you want.

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

1 minute ago, jehurey said:

what, exactly, is the "situational chance"

 

That the pollster found a person to ask the question to?

 

What are you even saying? LOL

Hotsauce highlighted it quite clearly.

 

"You could flip a coin 1,000 times and have it come up heads 900 times."

[Goukosan 2,255]

8 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

It's a baseline rooted in situational chance, that's not valuable no matter how much it's perpetuated. 

Oh wait.. I thought you were trolling about Polls etc...... So you're back now saying that dumb shit again? 

 

 

You better not post an extrapolated or projected stat ever again ....from now on... every stat you post must have reached every single American alive at the time the data was compiled or else it's not valuable. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Goukosan

[Goukosan 2,255]

4 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Hotsauce highlighted it quite clearly.

 

"You could flip a coin 1,000 times and have it come up heads 900 times."

That flew waaaayover your head.... he us saying it COULD HAPPEN... but the probability of it happening is "1 in a million" (figure of

speech. 

 

You left out his next line that says the probability of that happening is very low. 

 

"Is it likely? No." 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Goukosan

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

1 minute ago, Goukosan said:

That flew waaaayover your head.... he us saying it COULD HAPPEN... but the probability of it happening is "1 in a million" (figure of

speech. 

 

You left out his next line that says the probability of that happening is very low. 

I understand all of that but the induction of the possibility makes it absolutely worthless, and there's no way to gauge whether or not that possibility is in effect or not. 

[Goukosan 2,255]

9 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I understand all of that but the induction of the possibility makes it absolutely worthless, and there's no way to gauge whether or not that possibility is in effect or not. 

No you don't get it.  As I just said in a few posts above... you just invalidated yourself from using any probability statistic on this board ever again. 

 

You don't realize how much of the data that you yourself lean on religiously (out of context at that)... is based on a projection, or was extrapolated and or a probability. 

 

Data sets to represent an entire nation, millions of people etc are rarely ever actually reached those millions of people to tabulate said data.  In certain instances it does (accountability measures etc) but in general it doesn't. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Goukosan

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

6 minutes ago, Goukosan said:

No you don't get it.  As I just said in a few posts above... you just invalidated yourself from using any probability statistic on this board ever again. 

 

You don't realize how much of the data that you yourself lean on religiously (out of context at that)... is based on a projection, or was extrapolated and or a probability. 

 

Data sets to represent an entire nation, millions of people etc are rarely ever actually reached those millions of people to tabulate said data.  In certain instances it does (accountability measures etc) but in general it doesn't. 

I absolutely get it, you just don't agree with me and you're being an annoying faggot about it. 

 

I spitball with projections and extrapolation, you people take polls as religious propagated facts of reality. 

 

 

[Goukosan 2,255]

@DynamiteCop!  I'll give you an example.  I work with the state - I'm responsible for an accountability measure for over 125,000 unique data fields each federal fiscal year.

 

I ensure the data integrity and data quality of that info. 

 

The Feds would come in and review 5 to 7 of those.... then use the results from those 5 or 7 ro determine the quality of all those 125K cases. (Probability) 

 

The Feds then extrapolate that to determine if my state is in compliance for that federal mandate.   The results of each state then determines federal funding , drives changes in federal policies on a national level. 

 

So for you to say probability holds no weight in the real world is laughable at best. 

 

 

[Goukosan 2,255]

6 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I absolutely get it, you just don't agree with me and you're being an annoying faggot about it. 

 

I spitball with projections and extrapolation, you people take polls as religious propagated facts of reality. 

 

 

your lack of self awareness is astounding 

[jehurey 3,230]

1 hour ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Hotsauce highlighted it quite clearly.

 

"You could flip a coin 1,000 times and have it come up heads 900 times."

It could.................at a ridiculously low level of probability, practically to the point of a statistical impossibility.

 

In fact, and this was actually taught to me in 10th grade science.............the MORE you flip the coin, the more CONCRETE and accurate something is.

 

In all scenarios, the more you flip the coin, the more accurate it gets to demonstrating 50% percent heads and 50% tails.  No matter how many coins you test.........the more you flip them, the more the stats start zoning it on 50-50.

Edited August 6, 2019 by jehurey

[Casual 731]

https://www.kbzk.com/montana-man-accused-of-assaulting-child-for-not-removing-hat-during-national-anthem

 

lol perfect example of why you’ll never fix this type of shit in the states

 

imagine being this angry that a kid didn’t stand up for a dumbass song lmao

[jehurey 3,230]

2 minutes ago, Casual said:

https://www.kbzk.com/montana-man-accused-of-assaulting-child-for-not-removing-hat-during-national-anthem

 

lol perfect example of why you’ll never fix this type of shit in the states

 

imagine being this angry that a kid didn’t stand up for a dumbass song lmao

Just goes to show that these "patriotic" Americans aren't actually patriots.

 

We literally have a Supreme Court case from 1943 that has ruled that people should not be forced to make pledges to a country.

 

By definition, it means that they are not free individuals if they are forced.

 

It isn't Patriotism........its just Jingoism. And that usually goes hand in hand with Nationalism and Fascism.