Active Users:423 Time:17/09/2025 02:38:01 AM
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this Tor Send a noteboard - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM
Look at the TR for instance. We've seen many more uber-channelers come from that tiny region and a much higher % that would be expected from such a small region. Dozens of men and women have been picked up by both Towers from the TR and they are ALL strong enough to be AS.

You are both trying to apply a total population % to isolated regional variations and tiny populations of the overall channeling pool.


Again, 1000 is not a tiny sample, and, also again, aren't you now saying that genetics is relevant to sampling strength? What other explanation could there be for regional variations?
Fram kamerater!
Reply to message
The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 09:44:09 AM 1560 Views
Re: The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 10:21:27 AM 946 Views
That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:26:49 AM 1526 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:36:32 AM 939 Views
RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:11:19 PM 866 Views
Response to a few of your poorly researched points... - 29/10/2012 02:31:17 PM 810 Views
Re: RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:37:33 PM 823 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 819 Views
there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 08:18:18 PM 835 Views
Excellent point. - 29/10/2012 08:24:37 PM 871 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 780 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 755 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 774 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 921 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 782 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 722 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 732 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 825 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 729 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 823 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 743 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 759 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 759 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 743 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1490 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 1011 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 849 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 708 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:33:59 PM 1518 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:43:19 PM 1066 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 839 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 694 Views
Re: Still doesn't explain the difference - 10/11/2012 10:21:00 PM 779 Views
Yes that totally makes sense - 30/10/2012 08:07:16 AM 867 Views
Thank you! *NM* - 30/10/2012 10:19:15 AM 402 Views
That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:01:52 PM 812 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 751 Views
Who said it would? - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM 755 Views
let's not mix up "random" and "representative" - 30/10/2012 05:28:09 PM 824 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 831 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 861 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 900 Views
I would love for you to be right, because it would solve all our problems, but 0 is the challenge... - 29/10/2012 07:56:34 PM 863 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 884 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 453 Views
Truth is, Moiraine was being overly optimistic... - 29/10/2012 08:39:17 PM 804 Views
You're pathetic... - 30/10/2012 01:20:01 AM 743 Views
The quote isn't specific - 30/10/2012 08:32:36 AM 859 Views
Its highly specific... - 30/10/2012 02:15:38 PM 696 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1344 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 792 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 801 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 758 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 939 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 869 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 863 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 772 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 1100 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 874 Views
Re: Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:54:41 PM 754 Views
We do not know if Cadsuane or any of the Forsaken are Sparkers - 30/10/2012 10:33:55 PM 887 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 1005 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 873 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 849 Views
Not true... - 30/10/2012 11:49:57 AM 844 Views
One thing - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM 832 Views
That's the problem. The BC RJ has "built" has a minimum and a maximum value - 30/10/2012 05:48:55 PM 848 Views

Reply to Message