>> Statistics Make Headlines, Not Necessarily Sense
Having once worked in the field of cross-tabs, I would be the first to admit that polls and stats can say just about anything you want them to say. But your referenced article did not dispute the accuracy of the information, nor dispute the finding nor challenge the question posed, nor the sample size and corresponding margin of error, etc. Nevertheless, you dismiss the information merely because you could provide a hot link to an article that mentions it. Hey, so you can use a search engine! Your rejoinder proved nothing whatsoever, but I suspect that you already knew that, right? ggg.
>> "...if you were a long time reader, you would remember it from this thread. I posted it many times."
A long-time peruser of this thread, but until recently, I have tended to skip your posts due to a lack of relative value and original thought. ggg.
I wrote:
Moreover, I'll be even more interested in reading your assessment of Gershwin's testimony.
To which you responded:
Haven't read it yet.
Why not? I assume that when you post a link, you expect other people to check it out. So you don't provide the same courtesy in return? You have challenged and -- frankly -- berated Cheryl at every turn, but when she invites you to read a document that she considers to be important, you can't be bothered? Hmmmm...
Ken |
