|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
not even that high. i'd give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's even seen 100 people who think there is a conspiracy. whats the population of metro detroit alone? 3-4M??? assuming 3M, that's .003 percent. quite the statistical powerhouse. 
What is more ridiculous? Me thinking a large portion of Pistons fans think there is a conspiracy, or you thinking the only people that think there is a conspiracy are people that I've encountered?
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
first off, your concept of statistical validity is trash. the media certianly isn't a source of a representative sample. they will only be showing those who are "newsworthy". that plus four people on an internet message board equates to statistical significance? i think not.
I'm not sure who said there was a representative sample taken. In fact, I've said specifically otherwise. Representative sample doesn't even apply in these circumstances. So again, if you need any statistics/research methods help, I'd be willing to tutor you via PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,710
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,710 |
Originally posted by Davo:
So are you saying the only conspiracy theorists are those on this internet message board? That would be pretty amazing. I'd then have to research what about CEG makes Detroit Pistons fans think the referees are ganging up on them.
Way to miss the whole point of what I was saying. You are basing everything you think about this "conspiracy" on the few Pistons fans you have actually come in contact with and one guy who had a catchy sign in the crowd.
- Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392 |
Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
not even that high. i'd give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's even seen 100 people who think there is a conspiracy. whats the population of metro detroit alone? 3-4M??? assuming 3M, that's .003 percent. quite the statistical powerhouse.
What is more ridiculous? Me thinking a large portion of Pistons fans think there is a conspiracy, or you thinking the only people that think there is a conspiracy are people that I've encountered?
i never said that they were the only ones who think there is a conspiracy. creating false statements does not help your position.
Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
first off, your concept of statistical validity is trash. the media certianly isn't a source of a representative sample. they will only be showing those who are "newsworthy". that plus four people on an internet message board equates to statistical significance? i think not.
I'm not sure who said there was a representative sample taken. In fact, I've said specifically otherwise. Representative sample doesn't even apply in these circumstances. So again, if you need any statistics/research methods help, I'd be willing to tutor you via PM.
so am i to understand that you consider less than 100 people to consitute a "large portion" as you put it? because 100 out of 3M or more also constitutes a large portion, eh?
and allow me to pre-empt any "most of what i've seen" or "large portion of what i've seen" comments. again, simply because it's what you, personally, have seen, does not qualify it to be applied to the whole portion of the fanbase.
an analogy:
i've seen 1 C6 ZO6 out of the 1000 corvettes that i have ever seen, therefore, a large portion of corvettes are C6 ZO6's.
see how this is flawed on several levels? not only is it illogical to apply this percentage to all corvettes, it's also a poor example of taking a representative sample of the population of corvettes.
02 Mustang GT... Tuned by Nelsons. Low 12's, anyone? 
.....______
___|______\_____
|/-\_________/-\_|
.\_/...............\_/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
so am i to understand that you consider less than 100 people to consitute a "large portion" as you put it? because 100 out of 3M or more also constitutes a large portion, eh?
Again (v.23904852 X 10^35), I'm inferring that there is a large portion of Pistons fans who are conspiracy theorists. I've shown throughout this thread that it's not a bad inference to make. If I wanted to get an idea of what percentage of Pistons fans were conspiracy theorists, I would draw a representative sample and survey from there.
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
an analogy:
i've seen 1 C6 ZO6 out of the 1000 corvettes that i have ever seen, therefore, a large portion of corvettes are C6 ZO6's.
see how this is flawed on several levels? not only is it illogical to apply this percentage to all corvettes, it's also a poor example of taking a representative sample of the population of corvettes.
It's not flawed, since only a very small number of the Corvettes you've seen have been C6 Z06s. If you had seen 50 or 100/1000, then you could say a large portion of Corvettes are C6s.
And your analogy to the Corvettes is a very obvious fallacy of questionable analogy. Let me re-phrase it for you:
Have you seen a lot of Corvettes? Yes. Are most of those Corvettes C6 Z06s? No.
Have I seen a lot of Pistons fans? Yes. Are most of those conspiracy theorists? Yes.
Let me know if you need any further assistance with understanding philosophical logic. I'd be happy to tutor you via PM.
Last edited by Davo; 06/15/05 04:55 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392 |
Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
so am i to understand that you consider less than 100 people to consitute a "large portion" as you put it? because 100 out of 3M or more also constitutes a large portion, eh?
Again (v.23904852 X 10^35), I'm inferring that there is a large portion of Pistons fans who are conspiracy theorists. I've shown throughout this thread that it's not a bad inference to make. If I wanted to get an idea of what percentage of Pistons fans were conspiracy theorists, I would draw a representative sample and survey from there.
perhaps it would help to determine what you consider a "large portion of the pistons fan base" to be, and exactly how many piston fans you've encountered, and how many of them are conspiracy theorists. can you do that for me?
Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
an analogy:
i've seen 1 C6 ZO6 out of the 1000 corvettes that i have ever seen, therefore, a large portion of corvettes are C6 ZO6's.
see how this is flawed on several levels? not only is it illogical to apply this percentage to all corvettes, it's also a poor example of taking a representative sample of the population of corvettes.
It's not flawed, since only a very small number of the Corvettes you've seen have been C6 Z06s. If you had seen 50 or 100/1000, then you could say a large portion of Corvettes are C6s.
actually, davo, it's flawed for that very reason. a small portion of a non-representative sample cannot be translated (i.e. and inference cannot be made) to the whole population.
you can sit here and tell me over and over again that most of the pistons fans you've encountered are conspiracy theorists, but that does not change the fact that this alone does not automatically infer the same thing about the larger population. no matter how badly you would like it to.
also, i find it interesting that you keep trying to pull the conversation away from statistics and statistical significance. proper inferences absolutely require statistical evidence including an accurate representation of the population, which also involves percentages. without it, all you have is opinion and specuation. opinion and speculation do not magically become logical inferences without scientific evidence backing them up. no proper statistical representation = no scientific evidence. no scientific evidence = only opinion and specualtion.
02 Mustang GT... Tuned by Nelsons. Low 12's, anyone?
.....______
___|______\_____
|/-\_________/-\_|
.\_/...............\_/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 706
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 706 |
Well, I live in Michigan, and I've watched the entire finals out with friends, and I can tell you, just about every person I've talked to thinks that the refs are in the Spurs pockets. I think Davo has hit this on the head, and you just don't want to admit it.
The arugments here are insane.
Some of the calls were out of line, but you cannot say that its a conspiracy to make the Spurs win, or the Pistons lose, refs make mistakes.
Take a look at the Spurs yearly stats. Out of all of the games they played, I believe they average 30 pts from the freethrow line A GAME. That's just part of their game. Don't [censored] and moan because the Spurs know how to draw contact. When you have a hard defense going against someone who is LOOKING to draw contact and go to the free-throw line, you have a choice, give him the easy shot, or make him work for the 2 pts at the line.
God, you guys turned a fun thread into some stupid argument.
Spurs in 6.
E1
1999 Cougar - Supercharged 3L
1992 Talon TSi - AWD Turbo
1992 Eclipse GSX - AWD Turbo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
also, i find it interesting that you keep trying to pull the conversation away from statistics and statistical significance. proper inferences absolutely require statistical evidence including an accurate representation of the population, which also involves percentages. without it, all you have is opinion and specuation. opinion and speculation do not magically become logical inferences without scientific evidence backing them up. no proper statistical representation = no scientific evidence. no scientific evidence = only opinion and specualtion.
FYI I'm not planning on publishing my findings in any journals. Never did I say this was scientific, and never did I say it went anywhere beyond speculation and opinion. I've argued here (well, I might add) that my speculation and opinion is well-founded in my personal observations, and those of others in a position to observe.
...and the extent to which you have come to the conspiracy theorists' defense is further support for my opinion. If my opinion was so ridiculous then I would expect you to treat it as such and dismiss it.
The time you're putting in attempting to logically and scientifically discount my point is meant to distract from the idea that there actually is a large portion of Pistons fans who think there is a conspiracy against their team. Very nice, though less than creative. It's kind of hard to pass off the overwhelming sentiment among the fans in public domain as that of kooks and freaks, which is what you're trying to do (ironically with yourself in the kooks and freaks category).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392 |
actually, i personally don't have an opinion either way. i haven't watched a single game of the series (ask newman, he has to tell me who won, what the scores were, etc...). i'm not much of a basketball fan, but i hope the pistons do well.
i actually had no intentions of defending their position, but discussing simple logic with you cannot be accomplished without you bringing other aspects into the argument. sadly, i got sucked into it.
thank you for recanting on the fact that what you've been claiming as a logical inference is nothing more than opinion. you are certainly entitled to it.
i hope you learn to argue without the use of ad hominem attacks some day. the freaks and cooks may look at you as less of an antagonist, and more so an intelligent person with something to discuss.
02 Mustang GT... Tuned by Nelsons. Low 12's, anyone?
.....______
___|______\_____
|/-\_________/-\_|
.\_/...............\_/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
thank you for recanting on the fact that what you've been claiming as a logical inference is nothing more than opinion. you are certainly entitled to it.
I used a logical inference to form my opinion. No recanting here. If everyone had to form an opinion the way you're insisting they do, then there wouldn't be much opinion. It's not scientific, if that's what you mean.
Originally posted by MxRacerCamXXXL:
i hope you learn to argue without the use of ad hominem attacks some day. the freaks and cooks may look at you as less of an antagonist, and more so an intelligent person with something to discuss.
Oh? And what is '...if you need an education in logic I'd be willing to tutor you via PM'?
|
|
|
|
|
