Quote:
Originally posted by punkworld
I don't want to speak about your book with any authority. I don't care about the book, actually. I am not planning on reading it, simply because I currently have a list of several hundreds of books I still have to read.
What I am responding to are your statements. You use a random number from a random book as an authorative source, yet fail to give a rough outline of the research method used, and your only comments on the definitions used imply a major flaw in that method.
I can get almost any random statistical number I want on any subject whatsoever from some book written by some professor somewhere in the world. For example, this week, I read in a book by an American professor in sociology that my country is racially almost entirely homogenous.
|
Then if you have intention of reading it, and don't care what it says, then stop trying to debunk it without knowing anything about it. Also, since you say you give 2 shits about stats, then stop posting your own stats, even though they don't contradict anything I've already posted.
__________________
Alt Journals, Blogs for Perverts!
Fitness and nutrition writer, and UNIX/Linux Sys Ad in training
"Just as a man who has fallen into a heap of filth ought to seek the great pond of water covered with lotuses, which is near by: even so seek thou for the great deathless lake of Nirvana to wash off the defilement of wrong. If the lake is not sought, it is not the fault of the lake."