Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (3995)	3/21/2002 12:38:56 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

"Non-correlation" isn't an "anomaly." "Correlation" is what must be demonstrated, don't you know that? It's why large samples are used before correlations are claimed. Please answer the question about the appeals judges. Thanks.

To: Bill who wrote (3995)	3/21/2002 6:45:51 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

The stats show that in two states that implemented the death penalty in 1995, NY and NC, the murder rate dropped by its largest margin in 40 years in that year. You can argue other factors or non-correlation or some other anomaly, but you'd have to prove the flaw IMO. The stats for NY showed that the drop cited occurred in the year BEFORE the death penalty was implemented, and that the murder rate was in a downtrend for a full 5 years before. Doesn't that count as a flaw?