1. #8261
    Quote Originally Posted by Siraeyou View Post
    Clearly you don't understand a joke when it is so blatantly obvious. Also do you not understand that you can twist "experimented and researched" statistics towards any direction you want. All it takes is the correct sampling of people, which is why we have "legitimate" statistics that could show either candidate in the lead of for polls, in the same manner you can prove people prefer Coke over Pepsi or vice versa. Also the fact that you would take a little joke and try to use it as a challenge of my intellectual capabilities, is not only immature of you, but also shows you as a very ignorant and close minded individual.

    Edit: But to amuse you some more because you choose to fall back on your statistics, let's take a look at the statistics and foresight of a source that has been correct in every presidential election since 1980: http://www.colorado.edu/news/release...ado-study-says
    You're reaching here. You seem to have more faith in your ability to be humorous than you demonstrate. Your joke was not obvious.

    Your rant about the abusability of statistics is not at all related to your (apparent) joke about the made up nature of statistics. It's completely irrelevant to my knowledge of how statistic works as it has nothing at all to do with what you or I said about how statistics work prior to this.

    I apologize for taking it to be something it was not intended to be. But that I assumed it wasn't a joke wasn't entirely unreasonable given the way it was used: What you said is a pretty common escape used by some on these boards to deny the validity of sourced evidence.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurax View Post
    Jesus Christ? I could not follow his radical left-wing path. No, even if I did believe in a personal god, I would not have the guts, the extreme altruism and radical anti-capitalism necessary to call myself a Christian.
    Quote Originally Posted by ngc2440 View Post
    Hyperbole police! We have been alerted to several reports of some suburbian white guys complaining about racism. Ok I am going to give you a warning. You have 60 days to put on your big boy britches and stop being a whiny kid. Seriously. Time to grow up.

  2. #8262
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,206
    Is Nate Silver more reliable than the University of Colorado?

  3. #8263
    Quote Originally Posted by Grokan View Post
    Is Nate Silver more reliable than the University of Colorado?
    Yes, at least on this. The CO study is very limited.
    Potato.

  4. #8264
    Quote Originally Posted by Grokan View Post
    Is Nate Silver more reliable than the University of Colorado?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nate_Si...2.80.93present
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fivethi...term_elections

    Dude is freaky accurate.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  5. #8265
    Isn't the Colorado study as well?

    It seems more scientific to me and spans over a longer period of time.
    Last edited by Riidii; 2012-09-11 at 03:26 AM.

  6. #8266
    Quote Originally Posted by Riidii View Post
    Isn't the Colorado study as well?

    It seems to be more scientific to me and spans over a longer period of time.
    The data from CO is from 6 months ago, focused only on Economics, and CO only tries to guess the President. Silver correctly calculates quite a bit more than just the presidential elections.

  7. #8267
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    The data from CO is from 6 months ago, focused only on Economics, and CO only tries to guess the President. Silver correctly calculates quite a bit more than just the presidential elections.
    Like pretty much everything.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  8. #8268
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Like pretty much everything.
    I find it odd that Saebermetrics work in baseball, much less being able to be converted to calculate other stuff as well, but I can't argue with the results.

  9. #8269
    I would have to look at Nate Silver's methodology.

    If it heavily involves polls, there's a reason to be skeptical.

  10. #8270
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    The data from CO is from 6 months ago
    And in fact says it needs to wait for this month's data before it updates.

    ---------- Post added 2012-09-11 at 03:35 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    I find it odd that Saebermetrics work in baseball, much less being able to be converted to calculate other stuff as well, but I can't argue with the results.
    Let's go to WAR so I can WHIP your FIP!

    err... which thread is this again?
    Potato.

  11. #8271
    Quote Originally Posted by Riidii View Post
    I would have to look at Nate Silver's methodology.

    If it heavily involves polls, there's a reason to be skeptical.
    If it uses single polls that would be the case but aggregate polling is extremely accurate. As evidenced by Nate Silver's extreme accuracy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  12. #8272
    Quote Originally Posted by belfpala View Post
    And in fact says it needs to wait for this month's data before it updates.
    Correct. I'm interested in their update but with such... obscene social stances, I can't see an economics-only prediction as entirely accurate.

  13. #8273
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    I find it odd that Saebermetrics work in baseball
    It's always seemed very intuitive to me, but I think that might be because I'm just generally inclined to perceive things in a more mathematical sense than in a narrative view.

  14. #8274
    Cherry picking data to prove you are going to win doesn't and hasn't yielded victories.
    The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities.

  15. #8275
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    4,037
    Quote Originally Posted by oblivionx View Post
    Cherry picking data to prove you are going to win doesn't and hasn't yielded victories.
    Nate Silver's blog fivethirtyeight has been extremely accurate, even with house elections.

  16. #8276
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,206
    Good thing he doesn't cherry pick data then?

  17. #8277
    Quote Originally Posted by Daelak View Post
    Nate Silver's blog fivethirtyeight has been extremely accurate, even with house elections.
    And it's only being linked over and over again because it shows "Obama victory".

    Dukakis had 17 pt lead at same time and got trounced.
    The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities.

  18. #8278
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,206
    That's some mighty fine fallacious reasoning there. "You're only using credible evidence because it supports you."

  19. #8279
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    4,037
    Quote Originally Posted by oblivionx View Post
    And it's only being linked over and over again because it shows "Obama victory".

    Dukakis had 17 pt lead at same time and got trounced.
    Then make the bet:

    http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/co...tractId=743474

    and read this:

    www.electoral-vote.com

  20. #8280
    Quote Originally Posted by Grokan View Post
    That's some mighty fine fallacious reasoning there. "You're only using credible evidence because it supports you."
    Excuse me if don't put a lot of faith in dailykos bloggers.

    But if it wasn't the steady stream of "look Obama has already won" from 538 it would be some other site being linked.
    The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •