• Looking for a smarter way to manage your heating this winter? We’ve been testing the new Aqara Radiator Thermostat W600 to see how quiet, accurate and easy it is to use around the home. Click here read our review.

Flag dynamics

Status
Not open for further replies.
acist
Xenophobic
Transphobic
Islamophobic
Anti-immigrant
Anti-asylum seeker
Sexist
Right wing
Brexit supporter
Illiberal
Climate change denier
Anti-20mph speed limits
Anti-low emission zones
Anti-low traffic neighbourhoods
Anti-BBC
Anti-TV Licence
I could be all of those! just depends what side of the bed I got out of.
 
:)
I must remember that one when trying to teach people about the pitfalls of assuming that association implies causation - and, in particular, the need to get the chicken and eggs the right way around!

Examples I commonly use include suggestions such as that fires become more serious if more fire engines are sent to them, or that the more 'equipment' one attaches to a patient, the more ill they become,etc.etc. - but I think I'll probably add your granddaughter's one to my repertoire :)
Can’t argue with those “observations” by folk.
I know someone who understands that big cables run to the new fangled Windmills whether on Land or at Sea but thinks it is to make the Windmill Blades turn around!
 
Talking about getting the chicken and Egg thing the right way around we must remember that the correct answer is that the Egg came before the Chicken but I imagine that most of you learned people are aware of that.
 
If there are no ropes, how does one get the flag up/down?

One doesn't. It is permanently attached to the very top of a carbon fibre pole. The base of the pole has a hole drilled through it, so it can locate on the side of one of those washing poles, with the cross pins at the top. It locates, and hinges, on one of the pins. A rope then pulls the pole, complete with flag, vertically up.

The washing pole, is welded to the end of a scaff pole, and it is the scaff pole which is partially set in the ground, and bolted to a fence post.
 
But that minority is supported by the mods in their attempt (which is therefore successful) in silencing and driving away voices that they do not want to be heard.

If you are not some or all of these

Racist
Xenophobic
Transphobic
Islamophobic
Anti-immigrant
Anti-asylum seeker
Sexist
Right wing
Brexit supporter
Illiberal
Climate change denier
Anti-20mph speed limits
Anti-low emission zones
Anti-low traffic neighbourhoods
Anti-BBC
Anti-TV Licence
Pro Israel
ableism is not on your list of virtues, so can we take it you don't care about disabled people - disgusting
 
Can’t argue with those “observations” by folk. I know someone who understands that big cables run to the new fangled Windmills whether on Land or at Sea but thinks it is to make the Windmill Blades turn around!
As you will be aware, there are countless examples of such incorrect assumptions of the direction of a causal relationship, but any reasonably intelligent person should understand the 'silliness' of the sort of ones we've been talking about.

However, to be more serious, there are many examples in the real world of 'not-so-obviously-silly' situations in which there is an 'association' between two things which can easily be misinterpreted as indicating a direct causal relationship between two things when such a direct causal relationship does not exist.

This most commonly happens when there is a third thing (or more things) which is/are causally related to the other two, something which a statistician would call a 'confounding factor'. For example, if one compared all people who had been regular gym-attenders with all people who hadn't, one might well find that certain cancers, or other diseases, were less common in the former. Whilst that might be directly due to the gym attendance, it is at least as likely that it was due to gym attenders being less likely to smoke, more likely to have 'healthy diets' etc., with the gym attendance, per se, making little or no difference.

One attempts to avoid that problem by trying to 'compare chalk with chalk' (rather than comparing chalk with cheese) - e.g. by comparing non-smoking gym attenders with healthy diets with non-smoking NON-gym attenders with heathy diets. The real-world problem here is that, although at least some possible confounding factors are 'obvious' in this example, it is always possible that there are (sometimes many) 'confounding factors' that one was not aware of! Inappropriate attribution of a causal relationship is one of the most common errors sen in Statistics.
 
One doesn't. It is permanently attached to the very top of a carbon fibre pole. The base of the pole has a hole drilled through it, so it can locate on the side of one of those washing poles, with the cross pins at the top. It locates, and hinges, on one of the pins. A rope then pulls the pole, complete with flag, vertically up. .... The washing pole, is welded to the end of a scaff pole, and it is the scaff pole which is partially set in the ground, and bolted to a fence post.
Who is this "one" who has no ability to get a flag up/down the pole? - do many people really do as you described?
 
As you will be aware, there are countless examples of such incorrect assumptions of the direction of a causal relationship, but any reasonably intelligent person should understand the 'silliness' of the sort of ones we've been talking about.

However, to be more serious, there are many examples in the real world of 'not-so-obviously-silly' situations in which there is an 'association' between two things which can easily be misinterpreted as indicating a direct causal relationship between two things when such a direct causal relationship does not exist.

This most commonly happens when there is a third thing (or more things) which is/are causally related to the other two, something which a statistician would call a 'confounding factor'. For example, if one compared all people who had been regular gym-attenders with all people who hadn't, one might well find that certain cancers, or other diseases, were less common in the former. Whilst that might be directly due to the gym attendance, it is at least as likely that it was due to gym attenders being less likely to smoke, more likely to have 'healthy diets' etc., with the gym attendance, per se, making little or no difference.

One attempts to avoid that problem by trying to 'compare chalk with chalk' (rather than comparing chalk with cheese) - e.g. by comparing non-smoking gym attenders with healthy diets with non-smoking NON-gym attenders with heathy diets. The real-world problem here is that, although at least some possible confounding factors are 'obvious' in this example, it is always possible that there are (sometimes many) 'confounding factors' that one was not aware of! Inappropriate attribution of a causal relationship is one of the most common errors sen in Statistics.
I bet you are great fun to listen to in the pub
 
The very same one!
Yes, but as was my implied question when I wrote of "one", are there a significant number of people who erect flag poles which have to be taken down if they want to raise or lower a flag?
I am reminded of a neighbour who, a few years back, hired a cherry picker to install something high up on his house which was powered by an internal non-rechargeable battery :-)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top