"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
-- Benjamin Disraeli --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > The real problem with the study is the design itself. > > > > If it had a better design than a simple pre-post > > > > (which makes no sense for research of this sort) non > > > > of these question would be discussed. > > > > > > Are you saying the 36-hour hike in the murder rate > > > *was* an anomaly and that it *was* legitimate not > > > to take it into account? > > > > Isn't discounting a large surge in the murder rate during > > the period that crime was being measured > > It was not "a large surge in the murder rate during > the period that crime was being measured." It was a > spike occurring during a 36-hour segment of that > period (as I said). The immediately following week, > while the course was still going on, there were far > *fewer* murders than normal, so the average number of > murders per week over the duration of the course > remained the same as usual. > > > a lot like saying: > > > > "The IA course has successfully created a lasting state of > > peace, worldwide. We have not counted Iraq, Afghanistan, > > Darfur, Chad, Sudan, Western Sahara, Somalia, Nigeria, and > > Chechnya because they are anomalies." > > Even overlooking the fact that certain kinds of > anomalies are, indeed, statistically insignificant > (as the TM researcher new morning cited who was > defending the study pointed out, this was such > a case, given the small total number of murders > in proportion to the *much* larger total number > of violent crimes whose rate was being studied), > no, the spike in the murder rate isn't at all like > what you say. > > The D.C. study did not claim to have successfully > eliminated violent crime in D.C. on a permanent > basis; it claimed to have been responsible for a > temporary overall decline in the total number of > incidents of violent crime compared to what would > have been expected for that period if the course > had not taken place, and it *did* count the spike > in the number of murders per week. > > The claim is that the spike, given the very > small percentage of incidents of violent crime > that murders always represent (there are over > 10 times fewer murders than there are assaults), > was not significant with regard to the overall > decline in the number of violent crimes during > the study period. > > This was in response to the ignorant claim by a > critic that the spike completely invalidated the > results of the study.
