Active Users:1081 Time:02/11/2025 09:09:59 AM
Who said it would? fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM


And why on earth would any of those things be correlated with strength in the power?

Not one of those things is directly correlated to the power. But those factors (and the many, many others that I did not mention) can add up to skew the results in one way. The next 1000 people from the same area that came might have had an extraordinarily large number of women capable of being Aes Sedai. Just look at the Two Rivers. The point is, non-random samples are biased. There doesn't have to be one mechanism of bias, when the sample is self-selected.
Reply to message
The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 09:44:09 AM 1603 Views
Re: The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 10:21:27 AM 977 Views
That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:26:49 AM 1562 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:36:32 AM 958 Views
RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:11:19 PM 899 Views
Response to a few of your poorly researched points... - 29/10/2012 02:31:17 PM 844 Views
Re: RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:37:33 PM 842 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 837 Views
there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 08:18:18 PM 855 Views
Excellent point. - 29/10/2012 08:24:37 PM 895 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 801 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 776 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 792 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 943 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 808 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 742 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 755 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 846 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 757 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 844 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 770 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 779 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 779 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 765 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1533 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 1048 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 871 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 727 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:33:59 PM 1547 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:43:19 PM 1105 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 868 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 715 Views
Re: Still doesn't explain the difference - 10/11/2012 10:21:00 PM 794 Views
Yes that totally makes sense - 30/10/2012 08:07:16 AM 891 Views
Thank you! *NM* - 30/10/2012 10:19:15 AM 414 Views
That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:01:52 PM 834 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 768 Views
Who said it would? - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM 780 Views
let's not mix up "random" and "representative" - 30/10/2012 05:28:09 PM 846 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 855 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 889 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 925 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 900 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 907 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 484 Views
Truth is, Moiraine was being overly optimistic... - 29/10/2012 08:39:17 PM 829 Views
You're pathetic... - 30/10/2012 01:20:01 AM 760 Views
The quote isn't specific - 30/10/2012 08:32:36 AM 874 Views
Its highly specific... - 30/10/2012 02:15:38 PM 718 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1378 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 814 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 828 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 778 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 955 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 887 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 880 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 799 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 1120 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 894 Views
Re: Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:54:41 PM 772 Views
We do not know if Cadsuane or any of the Forsaken are Sparkers - 30/10/2012 10:33:55 PM 913 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 1037 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 912 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 892 Views
Not true... - 30/10/2012 11:49:57 AM 876 Views
One thing - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM 860 Views
That's the problem. The BC RJ has "built" has a minimum and a maximum value - 30/10/2012 05:48:55 PM 868 Views

Reply to Message