Graph and Logic Lesson For The Day

[PoliticalChic]

A lot of the things I said about the first post apply here again. At first glance the graphic looks impressive, but again you see a lot of clear signs of data manipulation. Notice how the stats above reference data from only two years, some from multi year trends, and none of them match up over the same period of time. All of that makes the above graphic very very fishy.

Note: I'm not saying there isn't the possibility of truth in there. Just that the data is so cherry picked and manipulated I can't tell if the message its trying to send is true or not.

If we were to take the categories above, track them over the same time periods, then we could look for correlation either through straight up linear regression on pairs of data categories or multivariable regression. This isn't hard by the way. It isn't hard math. Excel can do it. Wolfram alpha can compute this.

However the person who made this graphic made a conscious choice NOT to do this and to instead cherry pick data. That doesn't exactly instill faith in the data.

Tell you what: give me a few data sources acceptable to you and I'll run a few scatter plots like before. If the correlation looks good I can run a few regression models.

"... clear signs of data manipulation."

So....your premise is that Left wing 'factcheck. org' is out to support the very opposite perspective of the very Left wing Democrat Party?

Really?

You might want to think that through.



For your edification:

"Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group
To start, Ayers was the key founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001. Upon its start in 1995, Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Geesh, that alone connects all three. Well, it branches out even more from there.

Ayers co-chaired the organization’s Collaborative, which set the education policies of the Challenge. Oddly enough, Obama was the one who was authorized to delegate to the Collaborative in regards to its programs and projects. In addition to that, Obama often times had to seek advice and assistance from the Ayer’s led Collaborative in regards to the programmatic aspects of grant proposals. Ayers even sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”. They both also sat together on the board of the CAC’s Governance Committee. Obama and Ayers were two parts of a group of four who were instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern the CAC. Keep in mind that the “A” in CAC is for Annenberg, the owners of FactCheck.org. The funding for Ayer’s projects and those of his cronies was approved by Board Chair, Barack Obama."
Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group



With this new understanding in mind.....
...you may retract or modify your post at any time.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. I'm not mocking, I'm expressing sincere confusion.

Bad Math is Bad Math, regardless of the source. Left Wing, Right Wing, it doesn't matter. Using cherry picked data to support your conclusion, manipulating data to fit your conclusion, data herding, etc are all bad practices.

See if this helps:

Antonio Gramsci, Italian Marxisttheoretician and founding member and one-time leader of theCommunist Party of Italy. Gramschi’s motto is that of liberals today: “that all life is "political."

So you're saying your two pro-gun posts are Communist propaganda?

Look, bad math is bad math. It isn't limited to Conservatives or Liberals. It isn't limited to Right or Left. I've seen Republican and Democratic governors make idiotic decisions based on cherry picked data that were more wish fulfillment than sound analytical policy.

If you want to argue guns make people more or less safe, make the argument. Just, if you try to rely on statistics, be careful about what you post. It's way to easy to be led astray on manipulated data. On top of that, once the manipulation is revealed (and it will eventually be revealed) then your argument is finished whether you were right or not.

"...be careful about what you post. It's way to easy to be led astray on manipulated data."

What is the manipulation, and what is the political reason for same?

If anything......anything at all.....is proves exactly what I contend, because the organization that published the date is Leftwing, and would love to be be able to support the Democrat attempt to restrict gun ownership.