[CR]was: off-topic, now off-topic liars?!

(Example: Framebuilders:Pino Morroni)

Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 07:29:33 -0800 (PST)
From: "Dale B. Phelps" <losgatos_dale@yahoo.com>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <MONKEYFOODB7ThIT5DC0000391f@monkeyfood.nt.phred.org>
Subject: [CR]was: off-topic, now off-topic liars?!

Art Link wrote:

So it also follows that to know the "correct" number of cyclists involved in accidents at intersections( the most dangerous situation), we need to know how many were trying to cross with the light,how many against the light, how many doing right turns, how many left turns, et, etc, There are liars, damn liars, and statisticians. You do make a good point about the fallibility of summary statistics. (used up my last daily post) Art Link,San Antonio,TX,USA

OW Artie, The quote (attributed to Benjamin Disraeli) is "there are lies, damn lie, and statistics"... Statistics are not fallable, but poor use of statistics will not support a fallacious argument, and many people can rightly sense that fact without having to BE statisticians. A statistician doesn't use numbers to deceive, and a naive person trying to use numbers may not produce a well-supported argument, simply because they included some numbers, no matter how plausable the position appears on first glance. ...the numbers "simply are."

I take exception to your lumping statisticians into a phrase w/ "liars and damn liars" Please drop the thread, let's get back to on-topic. Where's some good Masi trivia?

Dale "yeah dipshit I'm a statistician" Phelps Montagna lunga Colorado USA

---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.