[CR]Re: numbers, damn numbers, and abuse of "statistics"

(Example: Books)

Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:08:24 -0800 (PST)
From: "Dale B. Phelps" <losgatos_dale@yahoo.com>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <MONKEYFOODnHM3SOlbp000038fc@monkeyfood.nt.phred.org>
Subject: [CR]Re: numbers, damn numbers, and abuse of "statistics"

YES,YES,YES!The statistics may be incomplete,but of ALL accidents involving cars 14% were riding with traffic,8% against traffic. It is therefore 75% more likely that you may be hit by a car if you are legal and riding with traffic. Aren't statistics fun! Art Link,San Antonio,TX,USA

NO NO NO Art, you're SO wrong. For your assumption/conclusion to be valid, you have to know that in all cases equal numbers of cyclists are on both sides of the road. There is no statistical evidence of this presented, so your reasoning is faulty. Thats a perfect example of why the average-thinking Joe hates "statistical arguements"....the assumptions behind the numbers are often transparently weak.

Dale "stat major" Phelps Montagna lunga Colorado USA

---------------------------------
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.