← Back to context

Comment by ahmeneeroe-v2

5 days ago

it's your data, not mine. I just did the math on it.

Your data is not so much math, but more a tangled macramé of logical gymnastics, pretzel logic, twisted topology, knot theory, and Marlinespike Seamanship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knot_theory

https://corpslakes.erdc.dren.mil/employees/motorboat/pdfs/Ma...

  • can you help me on the math between 8% and 11%? I'm showing that as .11/.08 = 1.375 or "37% higher".

    I generalized this to #1/#2 = % difference between the #1 and #2. It's not so much logic as it is arithmetic, but let me know if you still disagree.

    • Nobody thinks the arithmetic is wrong, we're saying you're engaged in (really transparent and unconvincing) deception.

      If the approval rate was 0.1% and 0.2%, does it give someone the correct impression to say "Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to approve of the killing?"

      After saying that sentence, would someone draw a diagram that's even remotely close to the actual probabilities and support levels?

      No. Of course not. That's called deception.

      If you say, "5-11% of Harris votes vs 2-8% of Trump voters approve," would someone be able to draw a diagram of probabilities that's pretty close to reality?

      Yes. They would. That's called honesty.

      So all you're doing here is adding to the outrage machine in, again, a really transparent, unconvincing, and deceptive manner. I know you probably think this is all clever and whatnot, but it really is wildly unimpressive.

      2 replies →