Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-12-2015, 10:52 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 10:44 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 10:41 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Can you, though? Because you seem to have missed - either inadvertently, or, worse, deliberately - the word relative, which I explicitly emphasised repeatedly.

Hint: if I measure a 100% relative increase on a 20% baseline, it does not mean I measured 120%.
Remedial hint: what's 50 divided by 40?

Without referencing the change in the total number of households, the relative change is misleading to most.

Eh? Say what?

If we were looking at, say, change in religious affiliation over time, it wouldn't matter what the nominal population there was either - just the change in proportions.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
08-12-2015, 10:52 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 10:51 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 10:41 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Can you, though? Because you seem to have missed - either inadvertently, or, worse, deliberately - the word relative, which I explicitly emphasised repeatedly.

Hint: if I measure a 100% relative increase on a 20% baseline, it does not mean I measured 120%.
Remedial hint: what's 50 divided by 40?

Wtf kind of quantum physics are you using?

It seems pretty easy to understand.

In 1969, 49% of all American households had a gun.
In 2015, 41% of all American households had a gun.

"It seems pretty easy to understand."

Clearly not Facepalm

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2015, 10:53 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 10:51 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 10:41 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Can you, though? Because you seem to have missed - either inadvertently, or, worse, deliberately - the word relative, which I explicitly emphasised repeatedly.

Hint: if I measure a 100% relative increase on a 20% baseline, it does not mean I measured 120%.
Remedial hint: what's 50 divided by 40?

Wtf kind of quantum physics are you using?

Fractions.

Are you familiar with them?

(08-12-2015 10:51 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  It seems pretty easy to understand.

In 1969, 49% of all American households had a gun.
In 2015, 41% of all American households had a gun.

What's 50 divided by 40?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
08-12-2015, 10:54 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 10:24 AM)yakherder Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 10:12 AM)TheBear Wrote:  That's what I call an arsenal!

How many guns did the San Bernadino shooters amass? Last I checked, it was 4 - two rifles and two handguns, used by two people. Did they find more guns at the house? How many guns are considered an 'arsenal'?

Any amount can be an arsenal. It would not be linguistically incorrect to say "I have zero guns in my arsenal." It merely defines your collection of arms, not a specific quantity.

I'll take quality over quantity.

[Image: maxresdefault.jpg]

I wonder whatever happened to ol' Charlton's collection?

Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.

[Image: anigrey.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Popeye's Pappy's post
08-12-2015, 10:56 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 10:48 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 10:39 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  8% reduction in one direction, 8% increase in the other.

Add in error and it is a change of ~16-20%.

Your math is as flawed as your logic. Drinking Beverage
Lol, it has nothing to do with that.

Technically you're right, because I was only really referring to the broader trendline - which is the same for either set of aforementioned data. Not that I even had any particular ideological valence; more fool me for assuming mere facts would be uncontroversial.

Although it does strike me as odd that when I casually refer to a change from ~50 to ~40 as 20% it would be repeatedly objected to. I would certainly not have predicted that.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
08-12-2015, 11:01 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 10:50 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 10:48 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  Lol, it has nothing to do with that.

Nothing to do with what? How rates change or what polling numbers indicate?
Actual math

49/100 * 41 equals 20.09 % relative difference.

Has nothing to do with 8% reduction in one direction, 8% increase in the other.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Slowminded's post
08-12-2015, 11:04 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 11:01 AM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 10:50 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Nothing to do with what? How rates change or what polling numbers indicate?
Actual math

49/100 * 41 equals 20.09 % relative difference.

Has nothing to do with 8% reduction in one direction, 8% increase in the other.

Then I misread which argument was being used to demonstrate a 20 percentage point change.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2015, 11:26 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 10:52 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 10:44 AM)Chas Wrote:  Without referencing the change in the total number of households, the relative change is misleading to most.

Eh? Say what?

If we were looking at, say, change in religious affiliation over time, it wouldn't matter what the nominal population there was either - just the change in proportions.

You originally said:
(08-12-2015 09:21 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Inevitably. The number of guns keeps increasing, but the number of actual gun owners in the United States has been trending down for decades.

That is not supported without knowing the actual number of households or population; the number of gun owners may be increasing.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
08-12-2015, 11:34 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
Arsenal is a misused term that the media loves to bleat at every opportunity.


An arsenal is a collection of weapons for arming an army.


A person's personal guns are simply a collection.

.....

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2015, 11:34 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 11:26 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 10:52 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Eh? Say what?

If we were looking at, say, change in religious affiliation over time, it wouldn't matter what the nominal population there was either - just the change in proportions.

You originally said:
(08-12-2015 09:21 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Inevitably. The number of guns keeps increasing, but the number of actual gun owners in the United States has been trending down for decades.

That is not supported without knowing the actual number of households or population; the number of gun owners may be increasing.

Ah, okay - my wording was bad. I meant to imply the "as a proportion" rider, because that's the only measure that's sociologically interesting (or meaningful).

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: