--- In [email protected], "Cliff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I agree that anything approaching these figures would be a > stunning proof of a clear effect of directionality. But the research > cannot be done by people with a HUGE motivation to find a particular > result. There is no credibility in that case. >
I think the TMO should pay researchers from other schools to do the research -- would not cost a lot, but would certainly make the credibility factor go way up -- altho your assertion that credibility is zero seems unwarranted, as this is what peer review is for prior to publication in academic journals. I don't think it would be difficult to agree on the protocols of what constituted a home with a southern entrance (although really vastu is defined by fences, not entrances, and many houses don't have fences, so there may have to be some agreement to only count houses with fences which are clearly south or east), and burglary stats are obvious enough. > Even if the figure is correct, there are a large number of other > factors that need to be eliminated. What neighborhoods were > considered, for example? Were houses with different directions > equally distributed in such neighborhoods? It would be real > easy to skew the results by taking all the south-facing houses > from low-income neighborhoods and comparing them to the > east-facing houses in gated, high-income neighborhoods. > There was no playing with neighborhoods in the Travis study, and of course no one would compare south houses in poor neighborhoods with east houses in good neighborhoods. The town would have to be chosen so that houses are unequivocally able to be classified as one direction or another, and where the right side of the tracks was not directionally biased. > And a researcher with enough motivation to come up with a > particular result might not even notice they were making > skewed choices. > Well, a researcher who wants to see an improvement in a patient may be unconsciously seeing a beneficial effect from a medication that he is testing for, but it would be hard to see how a researcher could find a house more southy or less burglared because of his unconscious desires -- I don't see "double-blind" as being relevant in a study of entrances vs. burglary rates -- there's not much wiggle room, as there would be in a patient's reported improvement. > --- In [email protected], "Bob Brigante" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "Cliff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Why does it strike me as nearly 100% certain that if all the > > details were > > > known on this "research", that it would turn out to be much like a > > > thoroughly rotten beam - impressive to look at, but without much > > > substance? > > > > Possibly one item that causes your certainty is the jokey claim > > inserted by Dixon that winning lottery tix were sold in east facing > > bldgs... > > > > Only a much larger study would find any credibility in the scientific > > community, but a very large study could be definitive, I think, if > > any number even close to the 75% more burglaries that Travis found > > were found in a large study. > > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
