Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 1/26/2002 11:01:31 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/26/2002 11:33:29 PM EST
Whatever works. I recall that during WWII, Freeman Dyson was asked whether British bombers should fly farther apart, to prevent "friendly" midairs, because the crews felt that they were being forced to fly too tightly. He crunched the statistics, and determined that they needed to fly even closer, because then they could give each other supporting fire against attacking German fighters. The numbers don't lie -- researchers do, when they cook the calculations to support a particular point, but the numbers themselves don't.
Link Posted: 1/27/2002 3:55:24 PM EST
Originally Posted By 71-Hour_Achmed: Whatever works. I recall that during WWII, Freeman Dyson was asked whether British bombers should fly farther apart, to prevent "friendly" midairs, because the crews felt that they were being forced to fly too tightly. He crunched the statistics, and determined that they needed to fly even closer, because then they could give each other supporting fire against attacking German fighters. The numbers don't lie -- researchers do, when they cook the calculations to support a particular point, but the numbers themselves don't.
View Quote
Interesting. I understood that he concluded gun crews contributed nothing to the survival/return rate.
Link Posted: 1/27/2002 4:25:19 PM EST
Hey, I have another variable for the statisticians: How about caliber of handgun carried?
Link Posted: 1/27/2002 4:44:21 PM EST
Sounds a lot like those idiots who thought they had an equation for assessing investment risk. They had a huge following and lots of investors, but the markets didn't follow their neat little formula and the company went out of business and took a ton of investors down with it. It was on 60 Minutes awhile back. There is no way to apply mathematics to social issues, it's an impossible dream. Anyone trying to do so is selling snake oil. That formula looks overly simplistic to me. There are far more variables in a city the size of London, probably more than anyone can even think of. And then you get into the problem of how they interact (or don't interact). Why do you think the social sciences use statistics in place of real equations, formulas and proofs?
Link Posted: 1/28/2002 4:41:37 AM EST
There is no way to apply mathematics to social issues, it's an impossible dream. Anyone trying to do so is selling snake oil.
View Quote
I disagree. People have been applying mathematics to social issues ever since the first attempt to divide four bushels of wheat between two farmers. The problem is that "social scientists" make too much out of flawed statistics and incomplete mathematical models. Garbage in, garbage out.
Link Posted: 1/28/2002 4:46:31 AM EST
Here's an idea - First, give your SUBJECTS a Second Amendment like we have. And allow them to be as armed as the criminals are. Which means FULL AUTO and handguns. Next.... Give you "bobbies" a friggen gun. The crooks already have them. You GB idiots shouldn;t need an equation to figger that out. That's my professional recommendation. Just send me a check for half of whatever you paid PA Consulting Group. [rolleyes] Stupidity seems to clump up in certain regions of the world.
Link Posted: 1/28/2002 4:48:12 AM EST
Here's an idea - First, give your SUBJECTS a Second Amendment like we have. And allow them to be as armed as the criminals are. Which means FULL AUTO and handguns. Next.... Give you "bobbies" a friggen gun. The crooks already have them. You GB idiots shouldn;t need an equation to figger that out. That's my professional recommendation. Just send me a check for half of whatever you paid PA Consulting Group. [rolleyes] Stupidity seems to clump up in certain regions of the world.
Link Posted: 1/28/2002 5:09:56 AM EST
Originally Posted By garandman: Give you "bobbies" a friggen gun. The crooks already have them.
View Quote
either that or increase the amount of Authorised Firearms Officers. IIRC, there are about 2000 AFOs I think that, with the british police, it's a pride thing. "we've done well without guns. We will continue to do well without handguns" having said that, i think SO19 was given G36Ks. SO13 still have MP5A3/A5s
Link Posted: 1/28/2002 5:11:39 AM EST
This equation assumes that human behavior and interaction is best explained by use of a linear function model. Linear functions are simplistic 1 or 2 dimensional models that naively assume for a given action there is at best only 1 given reaction. That is not the nature of human behavior and interaction, especially, with the highly variable mood swings and behavior of an emotional nature exhibited by large crowds of people, such as during rush hour and at attendance at sporting events and music concerts, etc.
Link Posted: 1/28/2002 10:20:52 AM EST
Originally Posted By Renamed:
There is no way to apply mathematics to social issues, it's an impossible dream. Anyone trying to do so is selling snake oil.
View Quote
I disagree. People have been applying mathematics to social issues ever since the first attempt to divide four bushels of wheat between two farmers. The problem is that "social scientists" make too much out of flawed statistics and incomplete mathematical models. Garbage in, garbage out.
View Quote
You didn't understand what I said. Allocating bushels of wheat is one thing, trying to predict human behavior and then allocate resources to the problem is quite another. I agree with the last part of your post though--get the book "How to Lie With Numbers" pretty interesting. A statistic in a vacuum is meaningless (i.e. every one you read in a newspaper--80% this, 20% that. Totally meaningless because of how subjective it is or how flawed the methodology was).
Link Posted: 1/28/2002 12:04:37 PM EST
A high school sophomore could have devised that formula. I'm in the wrong business.
Top Top