--- In [email protected], "markmeredith2002" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > But he hasn't seen the study. It used highly > > > sopisticated statistical methodology, and I don't > > > think it's even possible to speculate about what > > > was done on that level of sophistication. > > > > Well, its not magic. Based on a survey of available data, > > constraints on such and all, I can speculate with some degree of > > reasonablness as to what issues they faced, and how they > > approached the problems methodologically. I have been there. > > ExxonMobil scientists use highly sophisticated statistical > methodology to prove global warming doesn't exist, creationists use > it to prove evolution is a hoax. Highly sophisticated statistical > methodology is useless within a bad study design. > > My real pt - you have to be skeptical of studies which (1) support > the marketing of products made by the organization which is paying > the scientists to do the studies, and (2) support the particular > religious worldview of the scientists conducting the study. In the > case of the M-effect studies, you have both at work.
I completely agree on all counts. I was not using "sophisticated" to mean "unassailable." It may even be the case that the more sophisticated the methodology, the more opportunities to do some sophisticated fudging that would only become evident if you did an exhaustive examination of everything that went into and came out of the computer. But by the same token, the more sophisticated the methodology, if you don't have access to all the details, the less likely a *speculation* on what the researchers were doing (honestly or otherwise) is to be on target. In other words, I don't believe akasha is in a position even to guess at flaws in the study or to say the results didn't reflect the reality unless he knows *exactly* what methodology the researchers used. He has to be able to see the published study before he can make a relevant evaluation. I'm not at all sure he can come up with his own method, run all the numbers, get different results, and on that basis, without knowing what methodology they were using, say there was something wrong with their results. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 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/
