Re: Applying the Scientific Method...

If you have a medical emergency, stop reading, log off, and dial 911!

On 9/5/2024 10:01 AM, X, formerly known as "!Jones" wrote:

 
It is as obvious as gravity that gun proliferation and gun violence
tend to have a positive correlation.

>
Fact, not opinion:  In the USA, gun buying splurges do not have
a positive correlation with gun violence.  Also, non-urban areas
where gun ownership is high do not have corresponding high gun
violence.

Actually, simple correlation isn't a particularly compelling data
point and tends to vary widely (meaning +- 0.2, which is significant)
depending on the population; however, I know of no national data set
(except John Lott's) in which it isn't positive.

Now, is it possible to *find* a data set that isn't positive?  I don't
know, but I wouldn't wager you couldn't if you had long enough to look
for it.  In *general*, worldwide, it runs between 0.2 and 0.6
depending on *many* factors (e.g.: do self-inflicted wounds count as
gun violence?)  When you discuss correlation, always remember what a
high correlation there is between a rooster's crowing and the sun
subsequently rising.

Can you tell us the meaning of "correlation" without resorting to
Google?

If you're interested in statistical methods, I recommend:
https://www.pewresearch.org/about/follow-us/Methodological_research
(quarterly)   but I doubt you are.