Active Users:284 Time:07/04/2025 03:16:13 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 1492 Views
Re: The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 10:21:27 AM 888 Views
That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:26:49 AM 1455 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:36:32 AM 894 Views
RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:11:19 PM 804 Views
Response to a few of your poorly researched points... - 29/10/2012 02:31:17 PM 753 Views
Re: RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:37:33 PM 766 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 765 Views
there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 08:18:18 PM 783 Views
Excellent point. - 29/10/2012 08:24:37 PM 812 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 714 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 692 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 718 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 870 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 730 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 668 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 672 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 771 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 670 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 764 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 683 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 700 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 700 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 694 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1365 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 949 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 724 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 654 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:33:59 PM 1394 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:43:19 PM 914 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 705 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 639 Views
Re: Still doesn't explain the difference - 10/11/2012 10:21:00 PM 726 Views
Yes that totally makes sense - 30/10/2012 08:07:16 AM 814 Views
Thank you! *NM* - 30/10/2012 10:19:15 AM 376 Views
That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:01:52 PM 739 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 699 Views
Who said it would? - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM 705 Views
let's not mix up "random" and "representative" - 30/10/2012 05:28:09 PM 770 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 779 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 801 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 841 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 800 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 825 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 408 Views
Truth is, Moiraine was being overly optimistic... - 29/10/2012 08:39:17 PM 747 Views
You're pathetic... - 30/10/2012 01:20:01 AM 684 Views
The quote isn't specific - 30/10/2012 08:32:36 AM 808 Views
Its highly specific... - 30/10/2012 02:15:38 PM 636 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1289 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 738 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 742 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 683 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 884 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 808 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 807 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 713 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 1008 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 819 Views
Re: Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:54:41 PM 704 Views
We do not know if Cadsuane or any of the Forsaken are Sparkers - 30/10/2012 10:33:55 PM 833 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 879 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 815 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 783 Views
Not true... - 30/10/2012 11:49:57 AM 797 Views
One thing - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM 772 Views
That's the problem. The BC RJ has "built" has a minimum and a maximum value - 30/10/2012 05:48:55 PM 794 Views

Reply to Message