Quote:
Originally Posted by fdpaq0580
Depends on what the premise is. Ex: If premise is that the sea level is getting higher, one needs only data from multiple locations demonstrate the trend. Measurement of the depth of every square foot of ocean surface is not necessary. One who wants to argue the trend can always claim insufficient data, whether reasonable or not. Ask silly questions as red hearings. Claim data was , omg, "manipulated", when simply rounded up or down to a reasonable decimal point. And, who gets to decide what is critical to demonstrating a premise? The researcher? The ones requesting the research? Or some random guy /gal on totv? Just because, whatever it is, doesn't match one's own preferred narrative does not mean the demonstrated premise is "fake" or intended to mislead in any way.
|
Huh? Okay, so we are doing a study on US crime. Up or down? Well, it would make us look bad if we told the truth, so let's use data that excludes major crime centers. Voila! Crime is down! We weren't trying to mislead you! Same with the fake jobs report that keeps getting revised down by several hundred thousand every single time. No misleading, just made an honest mistake!
So tell me, did we only need data from zip codes 32159, 32162 and 32163 to prove crime is down? I mean, that's several data points.
Sorry, your argument is not convincing.