Climate Change

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by __HRB__

And if you think this is nitpicking, please consider that ignorance of factual logic leads to grave errors in judgment, such as the common belief that one comes out ahead after making a profit of 200% followed by a loss of 100%.

You do if you give 110% effort.

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

You do if you give 110% effort.

You can do a lot with interest rates, too. Consider:

Starting capital -$20, 1st quarter $10, second quarter $20. Growth rates are -0.5 and 2.0 so we get 0.0+1.0*i as an average rate if we take the positive root of the geometric mean.

Now we can criticize the fat cats on wall street for limited *cough* imagination *cough* if they don't give people in debt loans, since this is clearly a good investment.

[philmoore]

Originally Posted by __HRB__

In your example, you are actually computing the arithmetic mean of birth rates, which is a continuous variable, so you end up with a meaningful statistic. You must contrast this with the arithmetic mean of births, which is a discrete variable, so the arithmetic mean is a meaningless statistic.

You misread what I posted, where I was suggesting the arithmetic mean of total number of births per woman is indeed a meaningful statistic. Your background, you have said, is economics, so I am sure you are proficient in creating and using statistics. Where did you get this idea that the arithmetic mean of a discrete variable is meaningless? Can you quote any authority that backs up your opinion?

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by philmoore

You misread what I posted, where I was suggesting the arithmetic mean of total number of births per woman is indeed a meaningful statistic.

Births per woman is a rate and therefore not discrete!

Originally Posted by MooooMoo

Uncwilly is right on this one.

See? He's talking about the average number of legs, and you didn't spot it.

Originally Posted by philmoore

Your background, you have said, is economics, so I am sure you are proficient in creating and using statistics. Where did you get this idea that the arithmetic mean of a discrete variable is meaningless?

51% Monty Python ("I'd like to have an argument!")
60% Belief that Uncwilly didn't have it in him to disprove it

and

73% Had something to do with: Not everything that counts can be counted and not everything that can be counted counts.

Originally Posted by philmoore

Can you quote any authority that backs up your opinion?

It depends...are you a Frequentist or a Bayesian?

[philmoore]

Originally Posted by __HRB__

See? He's talking about the average number of legs, and you didn't spot it.

I think you mean the average number of legs per person. Any average is necessarily over some sample space.

Originally Posted by __HRB__

It depends...are you a Frequentist or a Bayesian?

It all depends on how I am using the statistics. Both points of view have validity in the proper contexts.

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by philmoore

I think you mean the average number of legs per person. Any average is necessarily over some sample space.

I definitely think that Uncwilly meant that.

Originally Posted by philmoore

It all depends on how I am using the statistics. Both points of view have validity in the proper contexts.

Bummer. This precludes my planned post: "Sorry, in that case there is nobody you would consider an authority."

Btw, if you're not careful I'll start arguing that a statistic which is an element of the domain of the sample space is more meaningful than one that isn't and you're being pedantic and sophistic about the degrees of meaninglessness. Hah!

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by __HRB__

See? He's talking about the average number of legs, and you didn't spot it.

Actually, HRB, MooooMoo did spot exactly what Uncwilly was talking about. What you're doing is pretending, for the sake of argument, that you don't understand that both Uncwilly, MooooMoo, and others on this thread are all referring to average number of legs per person when they write simply "average number of legs". (It's in the context.) You're dressing up your pretense in the terminology of statistics, which was a little funny the first time but is now tiresome. You know that, and we know you know that, so stop pretending. We all got the joke a while ago. Save it for some new audience.

[Uncwilly]

What are you doing about GHG emissions?

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

What are you doing about GHG emissions?

I think it's obvious that he has been trying to not exhale.

[CRGreathouse]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

You're dressing up your pretense in the terminology of statistics, which was a little funny the first time but is now tiresome. You know that, and we know you know that, so stop pretending. We all got the joke a while ago. Save it for some new audience.

I'm pretty sure __HRB__ is just arguing for argument's sake.

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by CRGreathouse

I'm pretty sure __HRB__ is just arguing for argument's sake.

No, I'm not.