How to Lie with Statistics

> The actual shame here is Newsweek reporting on that tiny slope at the end of the graph.

My business statistics teacher in college was garbage, but the best thing he ever did was mandate that we buy the book, How To Lie With Statistics as one of the textbooks.

It's a short book, written in 1954, and yet it is remarkably applicable to today. It goes through the most common ways advertisers, politicians, salespeople, etc use misleading graphs or charts or cherry-picked statistics to lie. And once you've read it, you notice it EVERYWHERE.

Possibly the worst set of graphs I've ever seen

​

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

How to Lie with Statistics

It's a short book that does a good job of showing how people manipulate the presentation of data to achieve their goals. If nothing else, it will raise your awareness of the issue and perhaps make you more skeptical of what you see and read.

It all boils down to hierarchy and of course it’s easy to push a certain outcome depending on how you present data. Color psychology plays into this pretty heavily.

The classic book How to Lie With Statistics is a great reference. It’s a quick read.

If you haven’t already, check out r/DataArt and r/visualization and The Economist is a publication with extremely well created visualizations. A lot of good inspo there.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393310728/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_q9iDFb662BJAM

That's the book by Darryl Huff

Beside the fucking point.

Hmm...really?

No offense but anybody that jumps into conclusions and interpretation without looking at scale ought to stay away from looking at any data at all.

Or perhaps get educated

How to Lie with Statistics https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393310728/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_i_ptiBEbAQ6ZT4J

I find this chart misleading. It should be annualized, or placed with discrete values, not percentages

For example. If I have a dollar and lose 25%, I have 75 cents. If I then gain 25% (same number), I am back up to only less than 94 cents. The chart does not reflect that. Read

Darrell Huff How to Lie with Statistics

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

Exactly. This article is a great case study for how to lie with statistics

Go read this, it will at least make it challenging for others to cut through your bullshit. https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

Oh, an analysis certainly can be biased lol

> 20 US veterans die from suicide per day

To be fair, this stat like all others is a stat which could be fudged and this was from 2016. With how bad the opiod crisis has become, and knowing we get all our dope from Afghanistan, I imagine it's not lost on the soldier's returning home and seeing all major cities full of fiends and zombies. Honestly whatever the number is, it's too high.

Fun fact: In 2015 issue of Business Insider Bill Gates was pictured with several books. One titled How to Lie with Statistics

I'm not ignoring facts.

I 100% agree with the statistics you showed. There is no disputing that.

But your interpretation of the statistics is not factual. There is a big difference between numbers and your belief of what they say.

Read the book How To Lie With Statistics

Hell it is only 12 dollars..

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

you can see why Bill was reading it.

Here's a good read on this exact topic. Nice and short too! How to Lie with Statistics

Haha I completely agree but you made me laugh with David Waller’s comment. Anyone who ever quotes a stat should read this book first: How To Lie With Statistics

Hello, humble sheep here, just dropped by to give a book recommendation. The book is "How to Lie with Statistics" by Darrell Huff. I have included a handy link to guide your Alpha hand most easily. It's always good to do a little studying before yelling in the town square. We don't want to make fools of ourselves, but what do I know I am but a sheep. Baaaah-bye now.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393310728/ref=cm_sw_r_apa_i_y8MAEbAZDMABN

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393310728/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_YgigFbV745229

> Stats don't lie

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

>And you base this on your extensive-time working with and studying people with gender dysphoria?

No, I base it on logic, common sense and an awareness of vested politics.

>What makes you think you're more qualified to judge whether or not gender dysphoria exists than actual doctors?

Do you speak for "Doctors?" My father is a medical doctor from a top 10 school and he thinks its bullshit. My mother is a social worker and she thinks its bullshit. Asking if it "exists" is a semantic argument.. "Gender dysphoria" might exist, but that doesn't mean I think we ougut to reinforce the delusion.. Especially not if it doesn't help to lower the suicide rate..

>You do realize that there are measurable differences between the brains of cismales and transgender MtFs?

Who funded the study; is it reliable? What were the methods used? Who funded the study? Do I need to buy you a copy of this book?

1. You just quote misleading statistics
2. Sealion and ignore when you get facts and studies to counter your bullshit.
3. Read links people send you and say they say the opposite.

You are full of shit. The other people were right in citing you following the alt-right digital tactics script.

> A mídia não é a culpada pelo coronavirus

Mas ela tem culpa, esse é TODO meu ponto.

Culpa pelo como ela reporta, causando fearmongering, que gera uma maior receita para ela, em virtude dos acessos que ela ganha.

1. Aparece um vírus com características X
2. Mídia distorce/mente/é vaga falando como se o vírus tivesse outras características, ou amplificando as que tem. Utilizando técnicas que parecem que saíram de livros.
3. População entra em pânico
4. Líderes de estado são obrigados a seguirem roteiro de apocalipse, se não são linchados pela população por "não estarem levando a sério".
5. Oportunidades de solução mais eficientes deixam de serem executadas em função do item 4

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=how+to+lie+with+statistics&qid=1592321924&sr=8-1

I went looking for the book you recommended, as I will be doing a lot of statistics as a research student starting this fall. I found How to Lie With Statistics by Darrell Huff and Statistics Done Wrong by Alex Reinhardt.

Could you clarify which one you're referring to? I would be interested in reading a copy while we're still in the summer months.

Ah yes. Statistics are always correct and furthermore can never be manipulated.

Let me educate you:

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

I think the fundamental issue here is your assumption of linear scaling. Let's break this down with a fun little example.

1. Assume I have 20 million easter eggs, all various colors. I tell you some percentage is full of candy and, through just contact, candy can spread to adjacent easter eggs.
2. I tell you that red easter eggs (symptoms like fever, etc.) are more-likely to have candy.
3. I let you open 5k-10k easter eggs a day, and you open a bunch of red ones and just a few ones of other colors. You find out 1000 have candy.
4. Later, I tell a lot of other people that you can collectively open 25k easter eggs a day. You start opening red ones, but also a lot more of other colors now. You find out that 1200 have candy, including those other colors.

How can I use this data to conclude that the overall spread of candy is decreasing?

We initially focused on testing people who were likely sick or likely exposed. It possible that, as testing increase and we relax this focus, our testing is now capturing a larger section of people that are not likely-sick or likely-exposed. In doing so, we may capture more sick people, but we are guaranteed to do it at a non-linear rate: we were careful to only test people who were at serious risk of having it then, and we are now broadening our testing to include other groups.

The basis of your argument is that of poorly-chosen averages, where you are grouping two non-uniform populations and attempting to treat them the same. This a common issue in representing statistics, as discussed in 1954.

The only thing jarring is you posting in that tone and thinking that it makes you sound smart lol.

>it’s that the facts are misaligned with the false mainstream narrative that you’ve bought into.

Keep telling yourself that buddy, you're tooooootally smarter than people that study criminology and economics because you've watched some super convincing youtube videos.

Some recommended reading for you

When I was in school, I loved my statistics class. The thing I found most interesting in that class was learning all the different ways people can take a data set and get it to say whatever you want it to say. If you are pro-gun, you can prove the benefit of guns using statistics and if you are anti-gun, you can take the same data set to prove that guns are harmful and show why no one should own guns. There is an amazing book that goes into detail about this and it is really well written. It's funny, it's easy to follow, it's not very long, it's pretty cheap, and it's something I recommend everyone read at least once. It's called "How to Lie with Statistics" by Darrell Huff. https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728 My point is, just because someone has a pretty graph showing you the wage gap is real doesn't mean it is. As for the "facts", you don't have them, OP doesn't have them, and the guardian doesn't have them. This is an extremely complex topic with countless moving parts and the people on your side of the argument can't even come together to agree on what the issues are. You guys can't even clearly define what is and what is not included in the issue. And if you guys ever do get your shit together, you still need to convince the other side that it is an actual issue, one with a realistic solution. OP wanted to start a dialog to talk about it and your response is to call him a dimwit. And if you are going to choose an article the prove your point for you, maybe pick one that isn't biased in your favor. There are plenty of central news stations out there.

The Soviet Union was famously troubled by misreported statistics in many fields, largely because the people reporting those stats looked better and were given better treatment by superiors as long as the numbers looked good and nobody could figure out they were fudging numbers.

This is still a problem today, everywhere in the world, in many different ways. Recently on Reddit, the subject of Japanese suicide rates was reported to have gone down. It was also discussed how police in Japan are now classifying many suicides as suspicious deaths if there is any doubt as to what happened, so the very way that numbers are counted affects outcomes.

One of the very few college reading assignments I found enjoyable was How to Lie with Statistics. It's a fun read and helps illustrate how information flows: https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728 Give it a read if you're in the mood!

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

Start with reading this. Then we can talk about it.

This excerpt was taking from a book that Bill Gates endorses; https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

Shh, people don’t want to hear that... it is super, super deadly... that is why we are all in this situation, because it’s deadly...we need to shutdown small business!!! Everyone stay home!! Be afraid!! Trust our government!! We are their #1 priority!! They know what is best for all of us!! Believe the science and statistics they force feed us!! Don’t read books like [How to Lie with Statistics.] (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393310728/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_hihKFbGD25BBJ) Obey, obey, obey, and don’t question—we all trust that the government has us as their #1 priority.

> If talking people out of believing in a conspiracy theory was so easy, we wouldn't be where we are now.

I'm not saying it's easy; it takes ~ 4 years of pedagogy targeted at fostered critical thinking. Courses like Calling Bullshit: https://www.callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html

In the spirit of intellectual self-defence: https://www.amazon.com/Short-Course-Intellectual-Self-Defense-Chomsky/dp/1583227652

Which is not necessarily a novel thing, courses and books like that existed in the past as well: https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

...but I believe building entire curriculi with this in mind, making sure that no course lives in an "ivory tower", is a bit of a more recent development.

> Stick to the stuff that is directly related to course content

I'm sorry for being so repetitive, but I have responded to this counter-argument several times already. Of course you shouldn't try to link everything to everything! But every course is directly related to some hot topic, or some conspiracy, or some justice issue, or some other important topic. If it weren't related to anything of value, this course wouldn't have been taught. No one teaches (or takes) courses for the sake of teaching (or taking) courses. Everyone has some beef in the game. And it is dishonest to hide from these point, just coz they are harder to tackle. I'm not sure what are the main problems in the world of steel alloys, but I'm sure there are some specialized controversies there. Most students are not taking courses that practical and narrow though. Most take, as you rightly put it, stuff like "baby stats". And courses like that (intro courses in general), are golden, as far as hot topics go.

> You aren't changing the minds you think you are.

I'm not changing your mind, that's for sure! But what I am saying about students is evidence-based, and/or rooted on peer-reviewed literature. Yet it seems I cannot convince you by persuasion alone, and unfortunately I cannot invite you on campus, because pandemics, so I guess I'll have to live knowing that you keep your courses mellow, and protected from real-life uncertainty. It's ok though. And also, somehow I think you're doing much more that you're allowing yourself to reveal here. If your courses are interesting, and I'm sure they are, they have to relate to the broader picture. You're just trying to deny it a bit, for the sake of the argument. It's ok.

Good luck! Always a pleasure to chat about these things a bit!

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

"How to Lie with Statistics"... a classic, you might enjoy it.

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728#reader_0393310728

Here's the original article from forbes which is more detailed than the crappy Huff Post biased summary: https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2020/02/07/obamas-last-three-years-of-job-growth-all-beat-trumps-best-year/#76cb24596ba6

Now to understand what is really being said here, peruse the following: https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

You will quickly realize you have been duped.

• The Tao Te Ching of Lao Tzu
• I Ching
• The Art of War by Sun Tzu
• The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli
• As a Man Thinketh by James Allen
• Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill
• How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie
• How to Lie with Statistics by Darrell Huff
• The 5 Love Languages by Gary Chapman

Okay, I don’t mind sharing information for whose who are open minded or willing to listen. Errr. I’m writing this twice because I accidentally deleted what I said the first time. Lol. Anyways.

Dr. Erickson (ER Doctor; Original video had 5Million+ views in a few days before YouTube deleted it) - https://www.bitchute.com/video/56R2zmYXSfIK/

Dr.Shiva (Former professor at M.I.T. And invented email) [ NOTE: Ignore the title of the video. He does a good introduction to his work/experience and how his company applies their technology to medicine. In short, his company can bring drugs to market without animal testing. Hard to explain.] - https://youtu.be/_omr8Gqa77A

Dr. Shiva + political pundit(an0maly) briefly discussing a Bill Gate’s recommended book, “How to lie with statistics.” - https://youtu.be/IW5e3ZHRcy0 - https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

Minnesota doctor discusses COVID numbers - https://www.foxnews.com/media/dr-scott-jensen-cdc-coronavirus-death-guidelines

Independent Journalists James Corbett and Jason Bermas debate the numbers. - https://youtu.be/waJwyDJYZ2I

>> Where does money come from?

Such a simple question, but the majority of the country can’t give a legitimate answer. The truth of the Federal reserve and how it came to be. HIGHLY recommend to everyone. Please. If there is one thing you do during this lockdown, understand how the Federal Reserve was made. Produced by James Corbett

• https://youtu.be/5IJeemTQ7Vk

In short, the data is all over the place. Stats can be manipulated. Hospitals are set up to report inaccurate numbers, though it’s not directly malicious intent. Predictions were vastly incorrect (thank goodness). And some of the biggest health organizations or businesses related to this pandemic have their hands in the same cookie jars as all the lobbyists and corrupt politicians.

Like I said, I accidentally deleted my first post. I had more direct video links pulled but I don’t feel like finding them again and giving context. (I’m on mobile). Here’s several independent journalists and their YouTube channels. Obviously, COVID is the tune of the town, you can find most of these Chanels covering information regarding the virus. I don’t agree with every channel’s opinion, but they’re respectable and honest.

WeAreChange - https://youtu.be/waJwyDJYZ2I

James Corbett - https://youtu.be/waJwyDJYZ2I

Jason Bermas - https://www.youtube.com/user/JasonJustice911

Tim Pool - https://www.youtube.com/user/Timcasts - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCe02lGcO-ahAURWuxAJnjdA

Dr. Shiva - https://www.youtube.com/user/drvashiva

Adam Green - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaRjFptz7970mppuiGuZtpQ

\> My point is, you should wear masks and it's a simple decent thing to do so.

Agreed. It stills bug me why a fake pandemic was the motivation for that, there is too many reasons that everyone should use it already and for instance Japan always did that with no fake pandemic to push it. Regular influenza killed reaps of people since always, specially from the corona risk group, even more than corona will ever do. But now it's fashionable to worry because the virus is new, right?

\> Local governments declaring a pandemic state to better control the situation is a good solution

No. It isn't. It is effectively doing more damage than the flu itself, that is a very, very inflated threat. The impact on mental health alone is larger than any toll from this flu. Not to mention theeconomic collapse, the stupid-high corruption cases motivated by ticking every death as corona death, the encrouching of public authorities on your rights of free roamming and free assemble, etc etc.

\> But still, wear masks and practice social distancing. It saves lives.

No, it doesn't. Also, it is just a flu, treated very effective with palliative methods like cloriquine. The risk group is literally the sick elderly, and there is a major case to be done that those people are not dying from corona, but being marked as dead from it because of the major finantial incentive from the pandemic state to contain it. The CDC itself said that only 6% of the corona deaths was the only cause mentioned (check commorbities), the rest being tested positive then dying (with very unreliable tests that go positive for anything), effectively dying WITH corona, not FROM corona. Of course, there's a case to be made for corona doing their condition worse; the regular flu does the same but apparently corona killed it and there's no more deaths from influenza almost nowhere for months now.

This is a huge case of how to lie with statistics. Some are true, some are pattently falsified, but the important thing is to push authority force onto the people so some political or finantial elite or another get whatever they want from it. While I agree that you should wear a mask and protect your loved ones that belongs to the risk groups, this being enforced by state authority is a huge slippery slope to push the most atrocious bullshit on people.

I'm not saying there's a big conspiracy to control the populace and transform the society in a V for Vendetta dystopia, but that whomever can or want to gaslight you with these pretexts, they will, from your crazy aunt or neighbor to politicians to corporations. They've been doing that, abusing the slightest pretext to gaslight you, since always. There is no reason to believe it would be any different now. Don't stop using the mask or social distancing, but don't hate on the ones fed up with it because they're enforced to do it under threat, because that certainly will not help.

SS: Here is a photo of Bill Gates with a stack of books. Assumably, books he has read. The very top book is “How to Lie with Statistics”. Here is the amazon link.

https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728