Is statistics falsifiable?
stats is a bullshit
im a cs student btw
>>8205943
>feminism.
Yes, /thread.
>>8205946
Explain
>>8205943
Of course, just ask the anti-smoking movement.
>>8205943
If by "falsifiable" you mean easy to manipulate, yeah. P-hacking, sometimes referred to as P-cucking, can be commonly utilized. That's not to say that you shouldn't trust stats, just that you should have an open, skeptical, sharp mind.
>>8205952
That's basically all they do to 'back up' their arguments.
>>8205943
Yes. But like most religions, you must have faith. No matter how many times your naive model of the real world is shown to be wanting and illogical, made into swiss cheese, you must continue to cling while acting as though you're simply "above it all". Proceeding to dimly blanket apply and shove statistics where they don't belong.
Unless you work as part of some corporate thinktank, marketing firm, or in PR. Then your job is to twist statistics to bullshit as hard as you possibly can.
>>8205963
That's not what falsifiable means.
>>8205943
People can try. But second hand peer review can often catch the culprit.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/science-retraction-gay-marriage-views-fake-data-118131
>falsifiable
That's like asking if you can write an essay full of bullshit.
Obviously you can.
The question is if someone will call you on your bullshit.
Maybe someone will. Maybe someone won't.
>>8205943
Not only is it falsifiable, but it is also incredibly variable, open to misattribution and misquotation and all round bullshittery, ergo, a goldmine for SJW groups and other extremist groups.
>>8205945
>fell for the cs meme
>>8205943
>falsifiable
Spoiler: Nothing is completely falsifiable or provable outside of mathematics. Stop repeating euphoric popsci memes
