Two Headlines that describe the same sporting event from 1980:
Moscow: USSR finishes 2nd in International Track and Field Event, USA next to last.
New York: USA wins International Track and Field Event
Not quite as bad, but I always notice one frequent poster on the bus about the dangers of giving sugary pop to kids:
“Only 30% of parents think that their children are obese. But 75% of children are obese.”
Now, it’s not too likely, but given the right breakdown of family sizes and a significant correlation of large families with obese children, all the parents could be correct in their beliefs.
That’s such an old joke that I really need a cite that some arm of the USSR actually used that line.
My current favorite has to do with medical statistics and early diagnosis.
Say that myself and my hypothetical identical twin sister both got the same deadly cancer, a variety that turns out to be totally untreatable. It developed atexactly the same time in both of us.
My sister got a screening test that found this cancer early, it was found on June 1st 2009.
My cancer was found only when symptoms started appearing which was June 1st 2011 .
Both cancers are totally untreatable and we both die on June 1st 2012.
My sister had a much better statistical outcome, she survived for 3 years after diagnosis, wheras I only survived for a year after diagnosis 
So I guess I should’ve gotten screened, then.
Complicating this discussion is the fact that almost 38% of statistics are made up on the spot!
Fair enough, but i don’t think i missed your point, because what you’ve said in this post is not how you described it in your first post.
In that post, you said:
The tautological thinking described in your first post had to do with percentages. I was simply pointing out that this particular tautology was unlikely, given that the poverty level is not defined (at least, by the federal government) as a quintile or some other percentage of the population.
The tautology described in your second post is similar, but not the same thing.
That’s absurd. It’s well known that over 60% of statistics are well-researched and thoroughly vetted.
Gee, thanks for point that out :rolleyes:
And I disagree. It’s the same thing. The uselessness of the story based upon a definition of what poverty is to make some kind of shocking statement about what poverty was because this X sized set of people were in poverty because thats what the definition of poverty was. Or something like that.
So, it’s an amount of money, not a percentage (if it was actual Federal numbers being bandied about and not some state or local measure that I don’t recall). BFD. Another funny thing about the article was it put a local spin on it. In an area that has a pretty damn low local cost of living, particularly if you don’t mind living a crap trailer outside of town.
And neuroman, that was funny. I’ll have to try to remember that one.
So which is it?
Is it so obviously the same thing that my pointing it out required a rolleyes?
Or is it not the same thing?
Hint: it’s #2. If you don’t understand why, i can explain it very slowly for you. Otherwise, you know what you can do with your smiley.
That’s not a lie with statistics. Just because you prefer statistics that support your position over statistics that don’t doesn’t make the other stats lies.
This is similar to the stats welfare advocates like to put out about how “most welfare recipients are on welfare for less than X amount of time”, which obscures the fact that one long term recipient is the equivalent of many many short term ones.
:rolleyes:
Wait a minute, you mean I lied with statistics. I better start a thread about that asap.
One of my favorites; I’m I’m frankly surprised no one has posted it yet…
On average, humans have less than two legs.
The average human being has approximately one testicle and one ovary.
And then there’s this Dilbert comic…