[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Kevin's posts



In article <406a0l$6pn@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
KENNY MORSE <kennystar@megaweb.com> wrote:
>
>>Also, let me construct a situation here. Let's say that you assert that
>>the majority of drivers on a particular stretch of highway with a 40
>>mph speed limit are driving at 47 mph, something you believe from
>>a combination of your own experience, talking with others who drive
>>that stretch of road, and a comparison of the speeding tickets of those
>>who've received them on this stretch. Now say that you received a 
>>$200,000 grant from a private donor to sit in the bushes for a year
>>with a radar gun measuring everybody's speed. The majority of drivers
>>are measured as driving 42 mph. What is your reaction to this? Pick one.
>
>I think that's obvious. Someone sitting in the bushes for a year who
>got the result YOU suggested.  You bet. Absolutely. I'd buy it.
>I only wish the studies done and suggested on this board were
>like THAT.>

A lot of them ARE done like that.  No someone does not sit in the bushes.  
Instead they use loops in the road to measure speed of passing vehicles.  
A completly unbias method (some may slow down for a rador gun if they have
a detector).  I suggest you ask for the traffic studies for some of these 
roads.  CA by LAW is required to give them, to you.

>>
>>Also, do you have any faith at all in science or the scientific method?
>>Have you ever taken any science classes? Are all scientists full of
>>it, or only ones that do traffic studies?
>
>Adam, you raise good points, but as I type this, I am watching
>a statistician on the stand at OJ trial trying to tell the jury that 
>the stats conclude that the evidence against him are probably flawed.
>I believe studies that are formulated in the example YOU gave.
>The fer shers.  As I say, the ones I've seen....nope.

Yes, I know studies can be flawed.  I watched a 20/20 eposide that makes 
that very point.  Many of the 55 kills study have been PROVEN to be 
flawed in the reasoning.  The Federal Goverment Study however has not 
been PROVEN to be flawed.  The federal goverment attempted to burry that 
study after giving it extensive review.  I am SURE that if it was flawwed 
the goverment would have found the flaw and dismissed it.  It however 
was not flawed so they tried to burry it.

I am a skeptic myself and I don't belive data I think is flawed and the 
studys at my web site or NOT flawed by any means.



-- 
* Kevin Atkinson, Clarknet I'net Serv., Maintainer of the Usenet Info Center *
*     Finger usenet-i@clark.net for more info on Usenet Info Center.         *
*    Or send mail to usenet-i@clark.net  with a subject line of HELP.        *
*  This is in its beginning stages and I could use any help I could get!     *


References: