Oh my. I think I see why this is hard for you.

You are taking an objective report, and assigning causality to intellectual capacity or lack thereof, and you have no meaningful substantiation. That's what I'm questioning. Pew didn't make the report to highlight a vast intellectual gap between believers and non believers, but that's the ball you're running with. They made a report that showed the differences between groups' answers to a set number of questions. They did not assign any correlation, nor did they place the means on a confidence interval. They did not even begin to plot main and interactive effects, which would be a MUST to even begin to make that report meaningful to the arguments here.

I too use statistics for a living. I'm an actuary, and formerly a quality control engineer. So i specialize in correlation, and design of experiments. That MEANS, that I don't recognize correlation, let alone causation without sufficient evidence. The population proportions would have to have been put on confidence intervals to have real statistical significance (simple hypothesis testing) for anyone who knows anything about statistics to bat an eyelash at it.

Further, correlation coefficients could have been derived if there was a valid point to be made about intellect. None was made.

What you are failing to understand, is the report is nothing more than a poll whose nature isn't entirely known, and whose drivers of observed effects are unknown, and therefore you cannot sensibly use it to make conclusions relevant to the debate here.

To be honest, anyone whose taken a 2nd year stat course could see that. Why do you think you're constantly warned not to take stats to heart?

You're in over your head dude.

Log in to comment