NATION

PASSWORD

2020 US General Election Thread IX: One Month and Counting

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Will the Third Debate Even Happen?

Yes
27
16%
No
61
36%
I Don't Know
36
21%
Too Early to Say
44
26%
 
Total votes : 168

User avatar
Australia-New Zealand-Taiwan
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Sep 28, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Australia-New Zealand-Taiwan » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:14 am

Biden is a pedophile

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31063
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Valrifell » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:15 am

Imperialisium wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
I don't think you understand what margin of error is in polling. Which isn't a bad thing, you just appear to be speaking from ignorance.


I’m not speaking of ignorance. I know very well how margin of errors work given my background. The problem with NSG is the precedence of taking a generic outcome pertaining to the outcome of something and then extrapolating it to create an entire persona, narrative, and even argument for the person you’re disagreeing with.

“Polls were wrong because of outcome,” isn’t technically incorrect. They (which can be any number of specific polls) predicted the wrong outcome of who won. No more or less from that comment should and could be gleaned. But as you see no one wants to really discuss how that happened or why they disagree; or, could it feasibly occur in predicting the outcome of the 2020 election. So they instead go for the horrible fallacies of just invalidating the person by going “you’re ignorant, you don’t know math, you are X here.”


Polls are not predictive, it's quite that simple. They are snapshots of support at any given point in time, and we saw that as we got closer to election day Trump and Clinton closed in on each other in a few key states to the point it was within the MoE, which coupled with the high percentage of undecideds that we caught, makes it (in hindsight) relatively unsurprising that the election shaped out as it did.

The polls right before election day were pretty much right! They captured the correct level of support between the candidates within error! That is the mark of a successful measurement!
HAVING AN ALL CAPS SIG MAKES ME FEEL SMART

User avatar
Imperialisium
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11565
Founded: Apr 17, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Imperialisium » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:16 am

Australia-New Zealand-Taiwan wrote:Biden is a pedophile


Source? If not this probably won’t abide well for you.
Resident Fox lover

User avatar
Washington Resistance Army
Post Czar
 
Posts: 48251
Founded: Aug 08, 2011
Father Knows Best State

Postby Washington Resistance Army » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:17 am

Imperialisium wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
I don't think you understand what margin of error is in polling. Which isn't a bad thing, you just appear to be speaking from ignorance.


I’m not speaking of ignorance. I know very well how margin of errors work given my background. The problem with NSG is the precedence of taking a generic outcome pertaining to the outcome of something and then extrapolating it to create an entire persona, narrative, and even argument for the person you’re disagreeing with.

“Polls were wrong because of outcome,” isn’t technically incorrect. They (which can be any number of specific polls) predicted the wrong outcome of who won. No more or less from that comment should and could be gleaned. But as you see no one wants to really discuss how that happened or why they disagree; or, could it feasibly occur in predicting the outcome of the 2020 election. So they instead go for the horrible fallacies of just invalidating the person by going “you’re ignorant, you don’t know math, you are X here.”


But that's the thing, apart from Wisconsin the polls weren't really wrong. Pretty much everywhere else, including how the national vote numbers went, the polling was perfectly within margin of error. You can't have much better polling than that.

Admittedly yeah a bunch of the election models should be mocked (like the one that gave Clinton a 99% chance of winning) because a lot of them ignored very glaring flaws in the Clinton campaign and the background in the Rust Belt that led people like me to say Trump was going to get a narrow victory there, but again the polling was mostly solid.
Greco-Roman Polytheist
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations 12:28 wrote:To those who ask 'Where then have you seen the gods? What conviction of their existence leads you to this worship of them?', I reply first that they are in fact visible to our eyes. Secondly, and not withstanding, that I have not seen my soul either, and yet I honor it. So it is with the gods too: from my every experience of their power time after time I am certain that they exist, and I revere them.
Julian the Apostate wrote:I feel awe of the gods, I love, I revere, I venerate them, and in short have precisely the same feelings towards them as one would have towards kind masters or teachers or fathers or guardians or any beings of that sort.

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31063
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Valrifell » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:18 am

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Imperialisium wrote:
I’m not speaking of ignorance. I know very well how margin of errors work given my background. The problem with NSG is the precedence of taking a generic outcome pertaining to the outcome of something and then extrapolating it to create an entire persona, narrative, and even argument for the person you’re disagreeing with.

“Polls were wrong because of outcome,” isn’t technically incorrect. They (which can be any number of specific polls) predicted the wrong outcome of who won. No more or less from that comment should and could be gleaned. But as you see no one wants to really discuss how that happened or why they disagree; or, could it feasibly occur in predicting the outcome of the 2020 election. So they instead go for the horrible fallacies of just invalidating the person by going “you’re ignorant, you don’t know math, you are X here.”


But that's the thing, apart from Wisconsin the polls weren't really wrong. Pretty much everywhere else, including how the national vote numbers went, the polling was perfectly within margin of error. You can't have much better polling than that.

Admittedly yeah a bunch of the election models should be mocked (like the one that gave Clinton a 99% chance of winning) because a lot of them ignored very glaring flaws in the Clinton campaign and the background in the Rust Belt that led people like me to say Trump was going to get a narrow victory there, but again the polling was mostly solid.


Punditry was wrong, polls and aggregates were not. We can even see this in that they pretty much clocked the popular vote split. That should have been the takeaway from 2016, but for some reason it never is.
HAVING AN ALL CAPS SIG MAKES ME FEEL SMART

User avatar
Cordel One
Senator
 
Posts: 4523
Founded: Aug 06, 2020
Democratic Socialists

Postby Cordel One » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:20 am

Australia-New Zealand-Taiwan wrote:Biden is a pedophile

A senile old man for sure, but not a pedophile. There is one candidate with a long history of sexual misconduct and assault, though.
Last edited by Cordel One on Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:24 am, edited 2 times in total.
Leftie and brunch interrupter
Pro: leftism, the Paris Commune, neozapatism. communism, anarchism, Marxism, antifascism, choice, the environment, LGBTQ rights, minority rights, direct democracy, universal healthcare, open borders, labor unions, debating, my comrades

Anti: bourgeoisie, rightism, fascism, capitalism, liberalism, racism, sexism, xenophobia, the police, military industrial complex, imperialism, USA, PRC, overused talking points
Open to TGs - Please join my region the DankLeft Commune!

User avatar
Imperialisium
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11565
Founded: Apr 17, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Imperialisium » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:22 am

Valrifell wrote:
Imperialisium wrote:
I’m not speaking of ignorance. I know very well how margin of errors work given my background. The problem with NSG is the precedence of taking a generic outcome pertaining to the outcome of something and then extrapolating it to create an entire persona, narrative, and even argument for the person you’re disagreeing with.

“Polls were wrong because of outcome,” isn’t technically incorrect. They (which can be any number of specific polls) predicted the wrong outcome of who won. No more or less from that comment should and could be gleaned. But as you see no one wants to really discuss how that happened or why they disagree; or, could it feasibly occur in predicting the outcome of the 2020 election. So they instead go for the horrible fallacies of just invalidating the person by going “you’re ignorant, you don’t know math, you are X here.”


Polls are not predictive, it's quite that simple. They are snapshots of support at any given point in time, and we saw that as we got closer to election day Trump and Clinton closed in on each other in a few key states to the point it was within the MoE, which coupled with the high percentage of undecideds that we caught, makes it (in hindsight) relatively unsurprising that the election shaped out as it did.

The polls right before election day were pretty much right! They captured the correct level of support between the candidates within error! That is the mark of a successful measurement!


My issue isn’t so much with the math as their methodology must have been flawed. Which in turn makes their math give a less accurate outcome. I wouldn’t be surprised if the MoE was actually higher than the 4.5% someone else posted here (if that percentage is accurate). But that may be predicated on what they had to work with in terms of numbers, accountable variables, and whatever formula they use.

From a forensic background stand point 4.5% MoE is extremely high. At least uncomfortably so and is pretty close to the 5% margin to be considered accurate at all.
Resident Fox lover

User avatar
Imperialisium
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11565
Founded: Apr 17, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Imperialisium » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:25 am

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Imperialisium wrote:
I’m not speaking of ignorance. I know very well how margin of errors work given my background. The problem with NSG is the precedence of taking a generic outcome pertaining to the outcome of something and then extrapolating it to create an entire persona, narrative, and even argument for the person you’re disagreeing with.

“Polls were wrong because of outcome,” isn’t technically incorrect. They (which can be any number of specific polls) predicted the wrong outcome of who won. No more or less from that comment should and could be gleaned. But as you see no one wants to really discuss how that happened or why they disagree; or, could it feasibly occur in predicting the outcome of the 2020 election. So they instead go for the horrible fallacies of just invalidating the person by going “you’re ignorant, you don’t know math, you are X here.”


But that's the thing, apart from Wisconsin the polls weren't really wrong. Pretty much everywhere else, including how the national vote numbers went, the polling was perfectly within margin of error. You can't have much better polling than that.

Admittedly yeah a bunch of the election models should be mocked (like the one that gave Clinton a 99% chance of winning) because a lot of them ignored very glaring flaws in the Clinton campaign and the background in the Rust Belt that led people like me to say Trump was going to get a narrow victory there, but again the polling was mostly solid.


Hmmm I see. Wouldn’t have any spitballing of MoEs and how pollsters and/or aggregates got those figures lying around would you?
Resident Fox lover

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39046
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Fartsniffage » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:27 am

US media are reporting that Covid-positive President Trump has cancelled his only scheduled event on Friday as he and the first lady isolate in the White House.

The event was set to be a phone call on Covid-19 support to vulnerable older people.


Perhaps his symptoms aren't so minor?
Strong opinions, lightly held.

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65030
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:27 am

Imperialisium wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
But that's the thing, apart from Wisconsin the polls weren't really wrong. Pretty much everywhere else, including how the national vote numbers went, the polling was perfectly within margin of error. You can't have much better polling than that.

Admittedly yeah a bunch of the election models should be mocked (like the one that gave Clinton a 99% chance of winning) because a lot of them ignored very glaring flaws in the Clinton campaign and the background in the Rust Belt that led people like me to say Trump was going to get a narrow victory there, but again the polling was mostly solid.


Hmmm I see. Wouldn’t have any spitballing of MoEs and how pollsters and/or aggregates got those figures lying around would you?

A typical MoE could be between 2.5 to 4.5
Male, Titoist cultural nationalist, lives somewhere in the Deep South, give me any good Irish, Canadian, or Scottish whiskey and I will be your friend for life. I'm GAY! US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies
Click Here for RP Info Embassy Program
Ambassadors to the WA: Senior Eve Šanœ, Junior Jon Æthr

RIP Dya

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65030
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:27 am

Fartsniffage wrote:
US media are reporting that Covid-positive President Trump has cancelled his only scheduled event on Friday as he and the first lady isolate in the White House.

The event was set to be a phone call on Covid-19 support to vulnerable older people.


Perhaps his symptoms aren't so minor?

That’s not good.
Male, Titoist cultural nationalist, lives somewhere in the Deep South, give me any good Irish, Canadian, or Scottish whiskey and I will be your friend for life. I'm GAY! US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies
Click Here for RP Info Embassy Program
Ambassadors to the WA: Senior Eve Šanœ, Junior Jon Æthr

RIP Dya

User avatar
Imperialisium
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11565
Founded: Apr 17, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Imperialisium » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:31 am

Thermodolia wrote:
Imperialisium wrote:
Hmmm I see. Wouldn’t have any spitballing of MoEs and how pollsters and/or aggregates got those figures lying around would you?

A typical MoE could be between 2.5 to 4.5


This makes me wonder how large their samples sizes are and their questions. 2.5 would be solid but anything above 3 makes me seriously start wondering. Then again there’s like 400 polls in the US and I doubt they’re all uniform in how they do things.
Resident Fox lover

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31063
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Valrifell » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:33 am

Imperialisium wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
Polls are not predictive, it's quite that simple. They are snapshots of support at any given point in time, and we saw that as we got closer to election day Trump and Clinton closed in on each other in a few key states to the point it was within the MoE, which coupled with the high percentage of undecideds that we caught, makes it (in hindsight) relatively unsurprising that the election shaped out as it did.

The polls right before election day were pretty much right! They captured the correct level of support between the candidates within error! That is the mark of a successful measurement!


My issue isn’t so much with the math as their methodology must have been flawed. Which in turn makes their math give a less accurate outcome. I wouldn’t be surprised if the MoE was actually higher than the 4.5% someone else posted here (if that percentage is accurate). But that may be predicated on what they had to work with in terms of numbers, accountable variables, and whatever formula they use.

From a forensic background stand point 4.5% MoE is extremely high. At least uncomfortably so and is pretty close to the 5% margin to be considered accurate at all.


And I've already mentioned that their methodology was off in WI, due to undersampling.

Your background as a forensic scientist is irrelevant which talking about more pure forms of statistics and mathematical modeling and when what we're measuring is something entirely unrelated to forensics. The MoE in 2016 was average for political science, it's just how that works, and has been like that since the advent of modern polling science.
HAVING AN ALL CAPS SIG MAKES ME FEEL SMART

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31063
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Valrifell » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:34 am

Fartsniffage wrote:
US media are reporting that Covid-positive President Trump has cancelled his only scheduled event on Friday as he and the first lady isolate in the White House.

The event was set to be a phone call on Covid-19 support to vulnerable older people.


Perhaps his symptoms aren't so minor?


Well, this is quite puzzling.
HAVING AN ALL CAPS SIG MAKES ME FEEL SMART

User avatar
Kexholm Karelia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1997
Founded: Sep 22, 2020
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Kexholm Karelia » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:34 am

Fartsniffage wrote:
US media are reporting that Covid-positive President Trump has cancelled his only scheduled event on Friday as he and the first lady isolate in the White House.

The event was set to be a phone call on Covid-19 support to vulnerable older people.


Perhaps his symptoms aren't so minor?

I hope not, I am praying with my family
Right wing conservative
Media is the enemy of the people
CCP delenda est
orange man bad. diversity is our strength. real communism hasn’t been tried yet. the hong kong protestors are paid by the cia. antifa protestors are good, hong kong protestors are american bootlickers. China is a better alternative to America. uyghur genocide isn’t real, and it is western propaganda. Trump should not have killed Soleimani. gender is a social construct invented by white supremacists.

User avatar
Cordel One
Senator
 
Posts: 4523
Founded: Aug 06, 2020
Democratic Socialists

Postby Cordel One » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:37 am

Kexholm Karelia wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
Perhaps his symptoms aren't so minor?

I hope not, I am praying with my family

Is it common for Icelandic people to be so invested in US politics?
Leftie and brunch interrupter
Pro: leftism, the Paris Commune, neozapatism. communism, anarchism, Marxism, antifascism, choice, the environment, LGBTQ rights, minority rights, direct democracy, universal healthcare, open borders, labor unions, debating, my comrades

Anti: bourgeoisie, rightism, fascism, capitalism, liberalism, racism, sexism, xenophobia, the police, military industrial complex, imperialism, USA, PRC, overused talking points
Open to TGs - Please join my region the DankLeft Commune!

User avatar
Imperialisium
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11565
Founded: Apr 17, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Imperialisium » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:38 am

Valrifell wrote:
Imperialisium wrote:
My issue isn’t so much with the math as their methodology must have been flawed. Which in turn makes their math give a less accurate outcome. I wouldn’t be surprised if the MoE was actually higher than the 4.5% someone else posted here (if that percentage is accurate). But that may be predicated on what they had to work with in terms of numbers, accountable variables, and whatever formula they use.

From a forensic background stand point 4.5% MoE is extremely high. At least uncomfortably so and is pretty close to the 5% margin to be considered accurate at all.


And I've already mentioned that their methodology was off in WI, due to undersampling.

Your background as a forensic scientist is irrelevant which talking about more pure forms of statistics and mathematical modeling and when what we're measuring is something entirely unrelated to forensics. The MoE in 2016 was average for political science, it's just how that works, and has been like that since the advent of modern polling science.


Yeah and I’m also saying their methodology was flawed.

It is relevant since I mention it on account of people making up my background for me repeatedly. Nor is how math works somehow different from field to field. A formula is a formula. 1 is still 1. What would be irrelevant is me somehow using it to gloat or invalidate someone else which is not what I’m doing. That’s why I tell people who do that that their credentials are irrelevant for the purpose of making themselves seem infallible.

“It’s just how that works,” doesn’t really assuage my concerns for accuracy.
Last edited by Imperialisium on Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
Resident Fox lover

User avatar
Zurkerx
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 9114
Founded: Jan 20, 2011
Anarchy

Postby Zurkerx » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:38 am

Fartsniffage wrote:
US media are reporting that Covid-positive President Trump has cancelled his only scheduled event on Friday as he and the first lady isolate in the White House.

The event was set to be a phone call on Covid-19 support to vulnerable older people.


Perhaps his symptoms aren't so minor?


That's tough to say but given he's 74, clinically obese, and has a common form of heart disease, I can understand why he's concern. After all, it does start out with mild symptoms but it can explode into something serious quickly. A prime example of that is Boris Johnson.
A Golden Civic: The New Pragmatic Libertarian
My Words: Indeed, Indubitably & Malarkey
Retired Admin in NSGS and NS Parliament

Accountant, Author, History Buff, Political Junkie
“Has ambition so eclipsed principle?” ~ Mitt Romney
"Try not to become a person of success, but rather try to become a person of value." ~ Albert Einstein
"Trust, but verify." ~ Ronald Reagan

User avatar
San Lumen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58186
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby San Lumen » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:38 am

Kexholm Karelia wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
Perhaps his symptoms aren't so minor?

I hope not, I am praying with my family

I pray for him too. I dislike the man but I do not wish him poor health.

User avatar
Imperialisium
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11565
Founded: Apr 17, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Imperialisium » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:40 am

San Lumen wrote:
Kexholm Karelia wrote:I hope not, I am praying with my family

I pray for him too. I dislike the man but I do not wish him poor health.


You’re too good for NSG.
Resident Fox lover

User avatar
Shrillland
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15964
Founded: Apr 12, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Shrillland » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:40 am

Cordel One wrote:
Kexholm Karelia wrote:I hope not, I am praying with my family

Is it common for Icelandic people to be so invested in US politics?


Is is common for US people to be so involved in politics of any nation besides their own, by the same token? Not really, but this is NSG.
Stand with Content Creators Like Me! Stand With The Union!
Plebiscite Plaza 2021
Here's my Takes on LatAm Votes!
In 1963, Doctor Who taught us all we need to know about politics when a cave woman said, "Old men see no further than tomorrow's meat".

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39046
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Fartsniffage » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:41 am

San Lumen wrote:
Kexholm Karelia wrote:I hope not, I am praying with my family

I pray for him too. I dislike the man but I do not wish him poor health.


I want the fucker in rude health for the many days in courtrooms and then jail that await him after he loses to Biden. May he live to be 100 and spend all that time wearing orange.
Strong opinions, lightly held.

User avatar
Northwest Slobovia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12411
Founded: Sep 16, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Northwest Slobovia » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:43 am

Imperialisium wrote:Hmmm I see. Wouldn’t have any spitballing of MoEs and how pollsters and/or aggregates got those figures lying around would you?

Better: here's a long list of current polls. If you click on any of the polls linked in the first column, it'll take you to all the polls for that state. For example, Florida, where we see that most MoEs are 3.5-4.5, but St. Pete Polls, whoever they are, likes big samples, and has it down to 1.8.

They also have 2016 polling still available, if you really wanted the data from last time. (WI listed in "leans Clinton" for example).
Gollum died for your sins.
Power is an equal-opportunity corrupter.

User avatar
Imperialisium
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11565
Founded: Apr 17, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Imperialisium » Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:45 am

Northwest Slobovia wrote:
Imperialisium wrote:Hmmm I see. Wouldn’t have any spitballing of MoEs and how pollsters and/or aggregates got those figures lying around would you?

Better: here's a long list of current polls. If you click on any of the polls linked in the first column, it'll take you to all the polls for that state. For example, Florida, where we see that most MoEs are 3.5-4.5, but St. Pete Polls, whoever they are, likes big samples, and has it down to 1.8.

They also have 2016 polling still available, if you really wanted the data from last time. (WI listed in "leans Clinton" for example).


Excellent, thank you
Resident Fox lover

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31063
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Valrifell » Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:00 am

Imperialisium wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
And I've already mentioned that their methodology was off in WI, due to undersampling.

Your background as a forensic scientist is irrelevant which talking about more pure forms of statistics and mathematical modeling and when what we're measuring is something entirely unrelated to forensics. The MoE in 2016 was average for political science, it's just how that works, and has been like that since the advent of modern polling science.


Yeah and I’m also saying their methodology was flawed.

Nor is how math works somehow different from field to field.


Statistics change depending on what you're measuring, most relevantly if the quantity is discrete or continuous. It's the difference between a Gaussian and Poisson distribution, different fields have different measurements that require different math applied to it. I can't imagine the mathematics required for forensics will be equally applicable to physics, because that wouldn't make much sense. They're concerned with different things.

You can not conclusively say they're methodology was flawed because the error doesn't line up with what would be expected for forensics, because you're concerned about entirely different things.
HAVING AN ALL CAPS SIG MAKES ME FEEL SMART

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 2nd Austria-Hungary, Adamede, Aguaria Major, An Alan Smithee Nation, Anatoliyanskiy, Andsed, Chan Island, Elejamie, Fartsniffage, Galloism, Genivaria, Heloin, Hirota, Ifreann, Kilobugya, Kingdom of Englands, Lysset, Majestic-12 [Bot], New Terrasol, Outer Sparta, Picairn, Ramdom state, Rusozak, Sartell Koltis, Sherechia, Souseiseki, The Huskar Social Union, The Restored Danelaw, Trixeland, Trollzyn the Infinite, Valyxias, Vashty, Warriors of Truth, Yasuragi

Advertisement

Remove ads