Dysphoria, TDS, “literally trembling”/panic disorders, learning problems/falling behind, “ptsd from trump!” - yo, they have fucking toxoplasmosis & are ganging up on people. Literally, they are diseased. This shit needs to be looked into with “serious” regard.
I know it's not the intent of the post but I seriously doubt any of these "effects" are adjusted for multiple comparisons. They're probably random noise.
I.e. bad science. I'll have to take a closer look though.
Statistically significant findings (when p<0.05) will happen randomly 95% of the time when there is no real difference. If you construct 20 different hypothesis tests, you'd expect an average of 1 that wasn't really significant. They did just that. Also, this is a survey. So probably terrible for any kind of meaningful inference. Probably another academic dredging their data (p-hacking) so they can publish.
To be fair, it is a .gov site, fwiw. Or is not worth anymore. Hard to say this year. Lol. Appreciate the insight. I am looking up more about it throughout the night.
The party of “Ass Eating”.
Dysphoria, TDS, “literally trembling”/panic disorders, learning problems/falling behind, “ptsd from trump!” - yo, they have fucking toxoplasmosis & are ganging up on people. Literally, they are diseased. This shit needs to be looked into with “serious” regard.
Table without text wrap.
STUDY: Republicans are more likely dog owners, While Democrats prefer CATS
https://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-dog-people-democrats-cats-2013-1?op=1
I think we are onto something you beautiful person.
I think so too Fren
I will keep posting about it until that PW Doc shows up as long as you will!
I know for sure we've got at least one P.W doc on here. Seen his posts a few times before.
I hope he sees this.
Where's our resident P.W doctor at?
i'd get a dog if i could find one that won't lick my face after licking its own balls and asshole
It's all in training. My wife insist our dog not do this and she never has.
I am dead serious, too. We need the liberals tested STAT.
I know it's not the intent of the post but I seriously doubt any of these "effects" are adjusted for multiple comparisons. They're probably random noise.
Wooshed me. Take a look and let me know what that means: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7040223/?fbclid=IwAR31buZo0-KwXx0tH6UEBBC14VMuUin3dM_iblkqiheEECwlxJiYQl6S7o4
I.e. bad science. I'll have to take a closer look though.
Statistically significant findings (when p<0.05) will happen randomly 95% of the time when there is no real difference. If you construct 20 different hypothesis tests, you'd expect an average of 1 that wasn't really significant. They did just that. Also, this is a survey. So probably terrible for any kind of meaningful inference. Probably another academic dredging their data (p-hacking) so they can publish.
To be fair, it is a .gov site, fwiw. Or is not worth anymore. Hard to say this year. Lol. Appreciate the insight. I am looking up more about it throughout the night.