William Chambers wrote on 2/28/00 7:42 AM:
>Horst,
>
>Get your shit together, What do you think about the polarization effect in
>the model y=x1+x2.
>
>Bill Chambers
>
>Horst Kraemer wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>On Sun, 27 Feb 2000 19:17:13 -0600, "William Chambers"
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I am sure you feel almost like a real doctor (MD).
>>
>>
>>> Listen to me little man.
>>
>>
>>> Now grow up and have a conversation with me. How in the world do people
>>> like you get jobs in universities.
>>
>>
>>
>>Stop depositing your faeces in newsgroups. Go to a public toilet.
>>
>>
>>Tank you
>>Horst
>>
>
The following is an exchange between myself and bill chambers from
October of 1997 in the forum sci.stat.consult. I post it here to point
out to relatively new readers of this list that Chambers has been doing
his insulting and circular reasoning on internet stats groups and lists
for a *long* time.
I recovered the post using Dejanews.
Paul
****Begin included message****
Mr. Chambers,
I have not made any insults of you or your method. I have simply pointed
out that you need to evaluate the
suitability of this forum for your discussion. If you think I've
insulted you, you need to quote the insult (answer in
public, on this forum) or retract your accusations against me (answer in
public, on this forum)
William Chambers said on 10/14/97 7:39 AM:
>Now, after making many insulting
>judgements, Paul is revealed as not having read my post that explains
the
>polarization of iv correlations across the ranges of their dv. Did you
>learn to behave so badly at Georgia Tech? Does your present "doctoral"
>program in education support such behavior? Will you ever get a sound
>education?
Correct, I have not read your earlier explanation of this unusual
terminology. I don't read every post that comes
from Stat-L. And I have unsubscribed at times off and on for the last 2
years so I may have not even seen your
previous writings on this matter. But if you insist on catisgating
someone for trying to engage in bonafide
discourse with you, so be it. I wouldn't want you to be uncomfortable in
this discussion.
Again you insinuate negative valence regarding Georgia Tech... why? What
axe do you have to grind against that
institution? Why does Georgia Tech matter to you? (You failed to answer
that question from my previous post.)
(Answer this by email, since this is a forum for discussion of
Statistics.)
>
>Cause y by adding uniformly distributed random variables x1 and x2. Use
100
>or more values per variable. Sort the data by y. Using a spread sheet,
>cut, paste and concatenate the data that correspond to the top and lower
>quaritles of y. You should have two data sets- that corresponding to
the
>mid-range of y and that corresponding to the extremes of y. Correlate x1
>and x2 for each separate data set. You will find that x1 and x2 (the
ivs)
>correlate positively in the extreme quartiles of y and negatively in the
>midrange of y. THIS IS THE POLARIZATION OF CORRELATIONS BETWEEN INVS
>ACROSS THE RANGES OF THEIR MUTUAL DV. Sorting the data by either x1 or
x2
>will not polarize correlations.
>
I see, I'll look at this. But my first thought is this is a natural
consequence of arbitrarily dividing the scatterplot in
the way you suggest. So, I'll trust that it is true (others can jump in
if my trust is misplaced). Why does it matter?
Don't jump ahead, what is the next consequence?
Please, explain it to me. Be patient because I want to understand.
>Now Paul, go back and read my earlier posts for a complete explanation.
>Then test this for your self. Test ten times. Be careful that you do it
>right. The honor of Georgia Tech is at stake. Then come back on line
and
>tell us what your massive intellect has discovered.
Egad! The honor of Georgia Tech is not defended by me. You can hand me
that sword but I don't have to pick it
up. The honor of Georgia Tech is defended by many others of much greater
capability than myself.
Also, I have never claimed a massive intellect in this forum. Where does
that statement come from? Do you assume
I have a massive intellect? Thanks!, but I don't really think so. Please
indicate, via email (not on this forum since it
is for stats discussion), where I've said something that leads you to
think so.
Finally, I ask this in all seriousness, is it *necessary* for you to
insult others when you converse with them? ("learn
to behave so badly...") What need are you satisfying?
+=============================================================+
How odd it is that anyone should not see that
all observation must be for or against some view if
it is to be of any service.
-- Charles Darwin, 1861
Paul C. Bernhardt, M.S. in Social Psychology (non-clinical)
+=============================================================+
****End Included Message****
===========================================================================
This list is open to everyone. Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages. Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.
For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===========================================================================
