Lewandowsky doesn't like us either

Messages
724
Likes
4,122
Location
Yorkshire, England
A researcher had a 32,757 year old in his data. Therefore, ALL researchers have 32,757 year olds in their data.

A researcher used minors without consent in his work. Therefore, ALL researchers use minors without consent in their work.

Professor Stephan Lewandowsky is wrong. Therefore, ALL Stephan Lewandowskys are wrong.

This logic thing is fun ;)
 

Yogi

Senior Member
Messages
1,132
Likes
6,879
Dr Harold Shipman was a serial killer doctor. Therefore ALL doctors are serial killers

Sir Jimmy Saville was a predatory paedophile. Therefore ALL those knighted (Sir) are predatory paedophiles

Psychiatrist Hannibal Lecter was a cannibalistic mass murderer. Therefore ALL psychiatrists are cannibalistic mass murderers.



Professor Sir Simon Wessley is a doctor who is also a psychiatrist and has been knighted by the Queen.
 
Last edited:
Messages
59
Likes
202
I have got a rather boring explanation for the 32757 year old minor. This seems to be a typical EXCEL error. 32768 is 2^15 so 32757 is 2^15-11, so the minor is actually of age 11. Or the whole is to be understood as two's complement. The number is just too close to 2^15. The p-value for my theory is p<0.001, so in the range of PACE. If this has been said already, I apologize one more time for boring.

Anyway, I don't oppose to the title of this thread.
 
Last edited:
Messages
724
Likes
4,122
Location
Yorkshire, England
I have got a rather boring explanation for the 32757 year old minor. This seems to be a typical EXCEL error. 32768 is 2^15 so 32757 is 2^15-11, so the minor is actually of age 11. Or the whole is to be understood as two's complement. The number is just too close to 2^15. The p-value for my theory is p<0.001, so in the range of PACE. If this has been said already, I apologize one more time for boring.

Anyway, I don't oppose to the title of this thread.
I have nightmares of learning to use EXCEL, but wouldn't it make sense to have some kind of specified range of values for the field? (like 18 -99 years) If you're doing research and want to include an age variable in the analysis - wouldn't you want to make sure your ages are at least likely?
 

Forbin

Senior Member
Messages
966
Likes
4,053
A very reasonable conclusion. Equally likely is that this person or this person actually have M.E. Let's go with that.-J
I think the 32,000-year-old person was actually a member of a study that looked for a correlation between climate change denial and belief in conspiracy theories.

http://websites.psychology.uwa.edu....yetalPsychScienceinPressClimateConspiracy.pdf




"Uhn! Thag think statistical models fail to account for cosmic ray influence on cloud formation.
Also think suspicious that "Martian" win Golden Globe for best comedy or musical."​
 
Last edited:
Messages
59
Likes
202
I have nightmares of learning to use EXCEL, but wouldn't it make sense to have some kind of specified range of values for the field? (like 18 -99 years) If you're doing research and want to include an age variable in the analysis - wouldn't you want to make sure your ages are at least likely?
I fear I have to defend Leandowsky in this case: these kind of errors happen anywhere, even in serious science...
However age of 32000 should skew results noticeable.
 

user9876

Senior Member
Messages
4,556
Likes
18,068
I fear I have to defend Leandowsky in this case: these kind of errors happen anywhere, even in serious science...
However age of 32000 should skew results noticeable.
These type of errors happen which is why checks need to be done on the data and results. If academics don't have a decent set of test errors will creep in and the results won't be trustable
 

jimells

Senior Member
Messages
2,009
Likes
6,160
Location
northern Maine
I have nightmares of learning to use EXCEL, but wouldn't it make sense to have some kind of specified range of values for the field? (like 18 -99 years) If you're doing research and want to include an age variable in the analysis - wouldn't you want to make sure your ages are at least likely?
Since they were creating propaganda with a predetermined conclusion, there was simply no need to bother with tedious details like editing the data, or even looking at it, apparently. Their bonehead programmers need to venture out of the ivory tower once in a while, although they probably wouldn't last a day in an office where software is expected to, you know... actually work.
 

jimells

Senior Member
Messages
2,009
Likes
6,160
Location
northern Maine
I fear I have to defend Leandowsky in this case: these kind of errors happen anywhere, even in serious science...
However age of 32000 should skew results noticeable.
Now that you mention it, I do recall a certain NASA mission to Mars that disintegrated because someone mixed up metric and standard measuring systems...
 
Messages
724
Likes
4,122
Location
Yorkshire, England
I fear I have to defend Leandowsky in this case: these kind of errors happen anywhere, even in serious science...
However age of 32000 should skew results noticeable.

These type of errors happen which is why checks need to be done on the data and results. If academics don't have a decent set of test errors will creep in and the results won't be trustable
Yes, that's sort of why I asked. I would've thought that entering vast amounts of numbers into a spreadsheet is just asking for errors to be made.

I used to work with a massive filing system where people were sorted by name and identifying number and these kind of errors happened all the time.

I'm guessing that specialist data entry clerks are not used in this kind of work, so I wonder what type of system is used to try to ensure the integrity of the data. I've made 3 errors just typing this message, but If it was just a list of numbers I would make a lot more, but I would hope that I would notice a neolithic age in a list of them. :p
 

Woolie

Senior Member
Messages
3,263
Likes
14,530
A researcher had a 32,757 year old in his data. Therefore, ALL researchers have 32,757 year olds in their data.

A researcher used minors without consent in his work. Therefore, ALL researchers use minors without consent in their work.

Professor Stephan Lewandowsky is wrong. Therefore, ALL Stephan Lewandowskys are wrong.

This logic thing is fun ;)
:rofl::lol::rofl::lol::rofl::lol::rofl:!!!