on
Former lecturer, Science Department
Southwark College, London
allenester...@compuserve.com
http://www.esterson.org
--------
RE: [tips] The joy of stats
Rick Froman
Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:59:07 -0800
I nominate this thread as the most inappropriately (or i
Chris Green writes of my posts in response to his repeated
commendations of *The Spirit Level*:
>This from the man who is criticizing a book he hasn't yet read.
Chris: Please check my posts and quote where I have given my personal
view of the book. All I have done is quote the criticisms of a wi
I nominate this thread as the most inappropriately (or ironically) named thread
in the history of TIPS given the extent to which each subsequent post has
clearly sucked all of the joy out of the list. In fact, my stats classes are a
laugh riot compared to this dreary sequence of ad hominem atta
I agree.
I wouldn't normally respond to Mike P's personal innuendos and
comments in kind (which are usually, if not always, initiated by him
to multiple posters on TIPS), but I thought I would this time in order
to highlight its inappropriateness and the degree to which Mike P is
willing to engage
Allen Esterson wrote:
>
> I note that, keeping in mind Mill’s dictum that “He who knows only his
> own side of the case, knows little of that”,
This from the man who is criticizing a book he hasn't yet read.
Chris
--
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3
Dec 2010 07:14:26 -0500
>From: "Mike Palij"
>Subject: Re: [tips] The joy of stats
>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
>
>Cc: "Mike Palij"
>
>On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 03:49:01 -0800, Michael Smith wrote:
>>Again Palij you mis
On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 03:49:01 -0800, Michael Smith wrote:
>Again Palij you miss the points. It's pretty funny how you do that so
>consistently, but not surprising.
>
>You don't confuse me by hiding your 'logic' behind being long
>winded...it's just really boring.
>
>Maybe instead of giving your inte
Again Palij you miss the points. It's pretty funny how you do that so
consistently, but not surprising.
You don't confuse me by hiding your 'logic' behind being long
winded...it's just really boring.
Maybe instead of giving your interpretation of wikipedia, just provide
a title and the link
that
Michael Smith writes:
>One funny thing in Allen's post was: "...who regards himself
>as “about as anti-inequality an economist as you’ll find”)..."
>Well I guess that settles that. This is proof positive that God
>exists. We have at last found a truly objective (unbiased)
>individual who is, miracu
Chris Green writes:
>Again, Allen overwhelms with far more bulk than (I feel)
>it is appropriate to respond to in a forum such as this.
So who decides what is appropriate as a response to another TIPSters
contentions? I could have quoted just a couple of the academic critics
of Wilkinson & Picke
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 18:11:45 -0800, Michael Smith wrote:
>Mike P:
>>"As someone who is familiar with the research methods literature in
>>sociology".
>
>Congratulations. I think most here are familiar with regression.
Non sequitur. You self-servingly edited out most of post which
showed that soc
Mike P:
"As someone who is familiar with the research methods literature in sociology".
Congratulations. I think most here are familiar with regression.
"I am puzzled about (a) why you are laughing (outside of your being prone
to laugh at things for no apparent reason)
...better than being a pedan
Hi
It is not just sociology that suffers from excessive ideological promotion /
criticism of non-experimental research. Psychology as well has many issues
(theories, models, whatever, ...) that will only or primarily be examined
non-experimentally. It behooves us as scholars / researchers / e
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 07:35:53 -0800, Michael Smith allegedly wrote:
>But the most hillarious one is from one critics response that Allen
>presents that includes:
>"The evidence presented in the book is mostly a series of scatter diagrams,
>with a regression line drawn through them."
>
>This is hilla
I think I'll try to match Allen's lengthy response.
I haven't read it (The Spirit Level) either (although I think I have
it somewhere and have been planning to).
I think Chris made a good point that it is a popular book and so
perhaps focuses on readability.
This, however, doesn't mean the analys
Again, Allen overwhelms with far more bulk than (I feel) it is appropriate to
respond to in a forum such as this.
I will say, in response to Kay's critique, that one should look at the whole
book. It is written for a popular audience, and so does not include
correlations coefficients in the mai
A postscript to my post on *The Spirit Level*:
I don’t pretend to have done more than glance through the *The Spirit
Level*. To properly read a book brimful of statistics I have to be (a)
in the right frame of mind (b) have little else occupying my time,
neither of which is currently the situat
On 15 December Chris Green cited evidence he thinks is supportive of
>the conclusions of the book I was "pushing" a few weeks
>ago: _The Spirit Level: Why Equality is Better for Everyone_.
As I wrote in a post under the thread on “objectivity” recently, while
one can never completely remove one’s
On 15 Dec 2010 at 5:34, Allen Esterson wrote:
> But just one caveat: he [Rosling] never gives the slightest indication that
> statistics can be a means of (deliberately or otherwise - and I think
> it is often otherwise) deceiving people. Evidently he has not heard of
> (or chooses to ignore in hi
ciences
Baker University
--
From: Christopher D. Green [mailto:chri...@yorku.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 8:17 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: Re: [tips] The joy of stats
Stephen Black drew attention to:
A remarkable graphical display of e
> Stephen Black drew attention to:
>
>> A remarkable graphical display of economic progress at
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
>>
Rosling fails to point out one of the most significant aspects of the
data: almost all of the increases life expectancy come between incomes
of
Stephen Black drew attention to:
>A remarkable graphical display of economic progress at
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
As the clip indicates, this is from a BBC 4 TV documentary, which I saw
last week. I have no comment on the topic of the clip itself, but
here's something on the p
quot;Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 3:28:22 PM
Subject: Re: [tips] The joy of stats
Hi
Just a small point ... the GDP axis is NOT linear ... it is a logarithmic
scale. Note the 3 values given at equal intervals are 400, 4000, and 4, the
logs of wh
Hi
Just a small point ... the GDP axis is NOT linear ... it is a logarithmic
scale. Note the 3 values given at equal intervals are 400, 4000, and 4, the
logs of which are 2.6, 3.6, and 4.6. It is this transformation that makes the
relationship appear linear. In fact there is a marked curv
Hi
Rosling has been doing a great job not only of presenting results, but of
making massive amounts of statistical data widely available in accessible form.
I've used his website at
http://www.gapminder.org/
for a class exercise in my culture and psychology course the past few years.
The BBC
As my students would say, really cool! I was looking (eyeball only) to see if
the line of best fit remained about the same through the years ... despite some
fluctuations, the basic positive (sort of linear) correlation remained. Now, if
we achieved what he suggested at the end - greater wealth
26 matches
Mail list logo
