1. #7961
    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.

  2. #7962
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,198
    Is Nate Silver more reliable than the University of Colorado?

  3. #7963
    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.

    Let's all ride the Gish gallop.

  4. #7964
    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.

  5. #7965
    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. #7966
    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. #7967
    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.

  8. #7968
    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. #7969
    I would have to look at Nate Silver's methodology.

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

  10. #7970
    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?

    Let's all ride the Gish gallop.

  11. #7971
    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.

  12. #7972
    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. #7973
    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. #7974
    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. #7975
    The Insane Daelak's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    15,964
    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    There is a problem, but I know just banning guns will fix the problem.

  16. #7976
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,198
    Good thing he doesn't cherry pick data then?

  17. #7977
    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. #7978
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,198
    That's some mighty fine fallacious reasoning there. "You're only using credible evidence because it supports you."

  19. #7979
    The Insane Daelak's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    15,964
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    There is a problem, but I know just banning guns will fix the problem.

  20. #7980
    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
  •