From the sh**t you can't make up pile

[Joe Republic]

The hottest illegal imports from Hong Kong right now: Louis Futon purses, Jimmy Cheese shoes and Rolodex wristwatches.

This thread really is sh**t you can't make up.

[A18]

J.J. --- Are you actually arguing that 940 heads and 60 tails is not statistically significant when the null hypothesis is that this is a fair coin?

[J. J.]

J.J. --- Are you actually arguing that 940 heads and 60 tails is not statistically significant when the null hypothesis is that this is a fair coin?

No, what I've been arguing is that this result is not statistically significant if you are attempting to show that the coin will always come up heads.  There is no question that it well exceeds the expected value for heads.

Look at the result, can you state with 95% certainty that the coin will come up heads?

[J. J.]

Someone had mentioned a watch, and I quickly skimmed it, and didn't catch that it was a Rolodex, which I only now know isn't a watch.

The only person who mentioned a watch was you.  The word "watch" does not appear in the article.

Rolodex:



Rolex:



They are not quite the same thing.

[A18]

If I'm not mistaken... the question is, can I say with 95% certainty that the probability of getting a heads is greater than one half?

[J. J.]

If I'm not mistaken... the question is, can I say with 95% certainty that the probability of getting a heads is greater than one half?

As soon as you enter into probability, you are looking at a different measure.

You could claim that the expected value is greater than you expected, even if it was 501 heads and 499 tails.  You can all sorts of things with probabilities, but you could not claim with 95% certainty that coin will come up heads.

[??????????]

Mod, could you please sticky this thread?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

J.J. --- Are you actually arguing that 940 heads and 60 tails is not statistically significant when the null hypothesis is that this is a fair coin?

No, what I've been arguing is that this result is not statistically significant if you are attempting to show that the coin will always come up heads.  There is no question that it well exceeds the expected value for heads.

Look at the result, can you state with 95% certainty that the coin will come up heads?

I never claimed that getting heads 94% of the time would imply that you get heads at least 95% of the time.

Someone had mentioned a watch, and I quickly skimmed it, and didn't catch that it was a Rolodex, which I only now know isn't a watch.

The only person who mentioned a watch was you.  The word "watch" does not appear in the article.

You seem incapable of reading. I never claimed that anyone had mentioned it on this forum, seeing as I started the thread.

If I'm not mistaken... the question is, can I say with 95% certainty that the probability of getting a heads is greater than one half?

That's almost right. What you decribed would be a 1 tail 95% confidence test or a 2-tail 90% confidence test. I was talking about a 2-tail 95% confidence test.

[Sam Spade]

I missed reading this thread earlier.  This may be one of the funniest things ever posted on this forum.

Classic.

[J. J.]

Someone had mentioned a watch, and I quickly skimmed it, and didn't catch that it was a Rolodex, which I only now know isn't a watch.

The only person who mentioned a watch was you.  The word "watch" does not appear in the article.

You seem incapable of reading. I never claimed that anyone had mentioned it on this forum, seeing as I started the thread.

This is hilarious!  :-)  One person did mention a watch.

One of DeLay's cronies in the House is accused of stealing a watch from another Republican.

http://coloradopols.com/archives/2005/10/holtzman_campai_1.html

The article doesn't use the word "watch," period.  The full text has been posted.

I'm beginning to wonder if JFRAUD hasn't been planted by the Republicans to make the Democrats look bad.  :-) That's actually beginning to look possible.

[ATFFL]

One of DeLay's cronies in the House is accused of stealing a watch from another Republican.

http://coloradopols.com/archives/2005/10/holtzman_campai_1.html

The article doesn't use the word "watch," period.  The full text has been posted.

I'm beginning to wonder if JFRAUD hasn't been planted by the Republicans to make the Democrats look bad.  :-) That's actually beginning to look possible.
[/quote]

Can you say so with 95% certainty?

[??????????]

One of DeLay's cronies in the House is accused of stealing a watch from another Republican.

http://coloradopols.com/archives/2005/10/holtzman_campai_1.html

The article doesn't use the word "watch," period.  The full text has been posted.

I'm beginning to wonder if JFRAUD hasn't been planted by the Republicans to make the Democrats look bad.  :-) That's actually beginning to look possible.

Can you say so with 95% certainty?
[/quote]

Let me flip a coin and see. lol

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

One of DeLay's cronies in the House is accused of stealing a watch from another Republican.

http://coloradopols.com/archives/2005/10/holtzman_campai_1.html

The article doesn't use the word "watch," period.  The full text has been posted.

I'm beginning to wonder if JFRAUD hasn't been planted by the Republicans to make the Democrats look bad.  :-) That's actually beginning to look possible.

Can you say so with 95% certainty?
[/quote]

Whatever you say, Mr.-a-95%-correlation-can-never-be-statistically-significant. I have no tolerance for Republicans like you who are wrong, won't admit they're wrong, and then bash me. You are exactly why I am not a Republican.

[Alcon]

Mr.-a-95%-correlation-can-never-be-statistically-significant

Talk like that will get you shot in some circles.

[MaC]

Mr.-a-95%-correlation-can-never-be-statistically-significant

Talk like that will get you shot in some circles.

I wouldn't shoot him, but I would tell him where he could shove the coin.  By the way STFU J-TROL

Does every post he makes end up with a stupid crap discussion like this?

[J. J.]

Mr.-a-95%-correlation-can-never-be-statistically-significant

Talk like that will get you shot in some circles.

Like meeting of real statisticians.  :-)

[J. J.]

One of DeLay's cronies in the House is accused of stealing a watch from another Republican.

http://coloradopols.com/archives/2005/10/holtzman_campai_1.html

The article doesn't use the word "watch," period.  The full text has been posted.

I'm beginning to wonder if JFRAUD hasn't been planted by the Republicans to make the Democrats look bad.  :-) That's actually beginning to look possible.

Can you say so with 95% certainty?

Whatever you say, Mr.-a-95%-correlation-can-never-be-statistically-significant. I have no tolerance for Republicans like you who are wrong, won't admit they're wrong, and then bash me. You are exactly why I am not a Republican.
[/quote]

Of course, this is exactly what a Republican plant would say.  So this is perhaps a little more evidence that Jfern is a GOP plant.  Interesting how he never seems to post while Karl Rove is on television.  Hmmm.

[ATFFL]

Whatever you say, Mr.-a-95%-correlation-can-never-be-statistically-significant. I have no tolerance for Republicans like you who are wrong, won't admit they're wrong, and then bash me. You are exactly why I am not a Republican.

Actually, my stance has always been that 95% is the standard.  I have never said 95% is not statisitcally signifigant.  In fact, I have maintained the opposite.  95% is signifigant, unless you are looking for a 99% relationship.  then it is not.  I suppose it would not be at 96-98%, but I can't think of a situation where they would be used.

This is either another mistake on your part or an admission that your 94% stance is wrong and an attempt to subtly shift your position to the winning one that we need 95%, which JJ, myself and every other person on this forum who has a clue has been saying since day one.

[Jake]

Obviously, the title of this thread is grossly incorrect.

[??????????]

One of DeLay's cronies in the House is accused of stealing a watch from another Republican.

http://coloradopols.com/archives/2005/10/holtzman_campai_1.html

Bump

[Joe Republic]

So is King Fahd dead yet?

[??????????]

One of DeLay's cronies in the House is accused of stealing a watch from another Republican.

http://coloradopols.com/archives/2005/10/holtzman_campai_1.html

Bump

[??????????]

While JFern continues to bump his silly sh*t. I'll bump one of his posts I think is hilarious!

[7,052,770]

1.  What's a rolodex?
2.  Didn't we finally decide jfern was right about the 95% thing?

[??????????]

1.  What's a rolodex?
2.  Didn't we finally decide jfern was right about the 95% thing?