I take it you have had absolutely no training in statistical analysis? because that is not what that means in the slightest. when you are doing a confidence study using statistical analysis of existing data. You make an assertion. like you would make a hypothesis in a scientific study. and then you say what your confidence is in that assertion. So it's not a matter of the data saying it was likely. That is the starting assertion : "We assert that it is likely that the pandemic was caused by a leak." and then, you say how confident you are in whether or not the assertion is correct. in this case low confidence.
It is exactly the same as if you made a hypothesis in a scientific experiment, we think that X variable has this much of an impact on Y process. and then your result is whether or not your hypothesis was true. and a rating in a statistical survey of low confidence is basically like like saying P approaches 1. On Sun, Feb 26, 2023, 5:56 PM Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > leaking pen <[email protected]> wrote: > > WASHINGTON — The Energy Department concluded with "low confidence" that >> the Covid-19 pandemic >> <https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/covid-19-urges-investigation-chinese-wuhan-lab-leak-theory-rcna32910> >> "likely" >> originated from a laboratory leak >> <https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/lab-leak-theory-science-scientists-rcna1191> >> in >> Wuhan . . . >> > >> Thats... not how reports work. On the question of, is it likely that >> covid came from a lab leak, the data says, low confidence. >> >> That means NO. it did not . >> > > Putting aside the issue of COVID, I think the expression: > > "conclude with low confidence that X is likely . . ." > > . . . is a convoluted way of saying: "X is probably true, but the evidence > is thin and it is only somewhat probable. Slightly more probable than not." > > It is a confusing, poorly framed way of saying this, but I think that is > what it means. I wouldn't want to have to translate it into Japanese. > >
