Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's a good one. When you provide statistical data to back up your point, and they try to point out how your data may (unlikely) be skewed while sounding like they have no idea how startistics, speciically medians and standard deviations, work.
How do you successfully get a point across when they pretend that the data you've provided is not sufficient enough to prove anything. If data is not good enough, then what is?
Sorry but DATA can be manipulated. Unless I totally trust the source I never rely on DATA.
If 100 people read a BIBLE verse yet they come up with dozens of interpretations what is the ultimate DATA? So I should trust polling data? No thanks.
BTW when religion is the topic under discussion, especially Islam vs Christianity I see one huge difference. A Radical Muslim believes He has a duty to either convert or KILL unbelievers while on Earth.
A Christian believes He has an obligation to share the GOSPEL with as many people as possible while on Earth. He is not obligated to KILL them if they do not convert. God decides everybody's fate AFTER we have died on Judgment Day.
Sorry but DATA can be manipulated. Unless I totally trust the source I never rely on DATA.
If 100 people read a BIBLE verse yet they come up with dozens of interpretations what is the ultimate DATA? So I should trust polling data? No thanks.
BTW when religion is the topic under discussion, especially Islam vs Christianity I see one huge difference. A Radical Muslim believes He has a duty to either convert or KILL unbelievers while on Earth.
A Christian believes He has an obligation to share the GOSPEL with as many people as possible while on Earth. He is not obligated to KILL them if they do not convert. God decides everybody's fate AFTER we have died on Judgment Day.
I'm not talking about polling data. I'm talking about data points collected and organized about a particular subject, and then analyzed to illustrate an outcome.
If you don't trust substantive data, then what do you trust? There's almost no way to prove something unless there is data to back it up. And if you don't trust data, then there's almost absolutely no way to convince you of anything. There'd be no point in "debating" a topic with someone like this, because they won't believe anything that they don't want to believe, even if you place the proof right in front of them.
I'm not talking about polling data. I'm talking about data points collected and organized about a particular subject, and then analyzed to illustrate an outcome.
If you don't trust substantive data, then what do you trust? There's almost no way to prove something unless there is data to back it up. And if you don't trust data, then there's almost absolutely no way to convince you of anything. There'd be no point in "debating" a topic with someone like this, because they won't believe anything that they don't want to believe, even if you place the proof right in front of them.
What is substantive data?
You talk about data points collected and organized about a particular subject. Subjects are subjective and by definition the answer is almost always an opinion. Very few things are absolute. With the exceptions of death and taxes.
What is substantive data?
You talk about data points collected and organized about a particular subject. Subjects are subjective and by definition the answer is almost always an opinion. Very few things are absolute. With the exceptions of death and taxes.
You're looking at data as if soomeone is providing you an answer to a survey. I'm talking about observable data. If x, then y. If t, then q. The study of data is what makes the world go round. Without the data I'm referring to, we wouldn't have airplanes or cars or medicine. You're telling me that you don't believe in that data?
Last edited by Left-handed; 09-06-2017 at 05:37 AM..
You're looking at data as if soomeone is providing you an answer to a survey. I'm talking about observable data. If x, then y. If t, then q. The study of data is what makes the world go round. Without the data I'm referring to, we wouldn't have airplanes or cars or medicine. You're telling me that you don't believe in that data?
Are you talking about observable events that can be documented using scientific methods? That kind of data is useful. However even true data has to be interpreted and can be manipulated. A current example is the ongoing debate over Global Warming (aka climate change). Another example of data that can be manipulated: the FBI's annual reports on crime statistics, the CDC also releases data sets that have been manipulated. What observable data are you talking about?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
