Originally posted by Wild Shadow
if we were to count all the planes that have ever crashed against how many were build of each model what would be the odds or statistic?would it be higher or lower to what they are now?
I find this question very confusing, I think its the last sentence that causes it "would it be higher or lower to what they are now?"
what is the it, and when is then compared to now?
Originally posted by Bardock42
Just answer my question, bro.Do you believe that when you go on a plane it is absolutely random whether it is going to fall, or do the factors that cause the statistics to be the way they are, also have bearing on you going on this plane?
well, there's the first time you've asked one. happy to.
the fallacy in your question, however, is that there are no factors that cause a statistic. Statistics only show end results in numerical form, not the hundreds or thousands of variables that come together (chaos) that affected the end result....i.e. causing a plane crash.
when you go on a plane, it may fall.....it may not. there is no number that can determine if it will or not. no number accounts for the variables that randomly combine to result in a crash. no past plane crash in the history of the universe can be used to determine a probability of a plane to crash as every other plane crash in the history of the universe had a distinctly seperate set of variables that came together to result in a crash. there is your answer.
Any time you get on a plane, the probability of you crashing is the exact same as the probability of some guy who died in a plane crash last year crashing and dying. It's the same probability as every other person on earth who engages in air travel every day and never have a problem. That probability is non-existant. The universe is just a bunch of matter flying around bumping into one another. Sometimes these interactions cause you to go down in flames, sometimes it doesn't. No way to tell beforehand.
Originally posted by Evil Dead
the fallacy in your question, however, is that there are no factors that cause a statistic. Statistics only show end results in numerical form, not the hundreds or thousands of variables that come together (chaos) that affected the end result....i.e. causing a plane crash.
Again, you say two opposing things imo. You say statistics don't have factors influencing them, then you just say that there are variables that do. Could you clarify what you mean?
Originally posted by Evil Dead
when you go on a plane, it may fall.....it may not. there is no number that can determine if it will or not. no number accounts for the variables that randomly combine to result in a crash. no past plane crash in the history of the universe can be used to determine a probability of a plane to crash as every other plane crash in the history of the universe had a distinctly seperate set of variables that came together to result in a crash. there is your answer.
But they are not necessarily separate and they are certainly not random. That's why statistics stay similar, and that's why they can tell you probabilities (as you yourself go into in the next paragraph, again swinging around) and that's why they matter to you.
Originally posted by Evil Dead
Any time you get on a plane, the probability of you crashing is the exact same as the probability of some guy who died in a plane crash last year crashing and dying. It's the same probability as every other person on earth who engages in air travel every day and never have a problem. That probability is non-existant. The universe is just a bunch of matter flying around bumping into one another. Sometimes these interactions cause you to go down in flames, sometimes it doesn't. No way to tell beforehand.
I wouldn't say it is necessarily the same, but without knowledge of the factors, like you say, it makes sense to assume the probability is similar (probably something along the lines of what statistics say). Then you say the probability is non-existent, what's that supposed to mean now. Do you think that everything happening is random, that it has an equal possibility? I mean, you obviously don't...you think it is less likely that an asteroid hits you than that you are going to poop today...so, why the distaste for statistics, which show what these probabilities have caused so far, which you then can make judgements from. If 100% of ships had sank last year, would you just jam your thumb up your ass and sing "Lalala I will go on a ship, cause it's just random lalala"?
No, you'd be like, "****, maybe I not go on ships, they seem to sink an awful lot, possibly cause some variables got together to **** it up..."
So, again, contradicting yourself left and right...and obviously saying things you don't actually live by. No one is denying that Statistics can be horseshit, but the field of Statistics some of the samples are just dead accurate, and do say things about your life.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
if we were to count all the planes that have ever crashed against how many were build of each model what would be the odds or statistic?would it be higher or lower to what they are now?
that would be less effective, as a plane with 600 flights and 1 crash and one with 1 flight and one crash would have the same probability of crashing.
The best would be to take each make and model of plane, tally each flight (or better, tally total flight miles) then average it against the number of crashes.
the poster of this thread along with evil dead are showing a profound lack of understanding on what statistics ARE. they are not SUPPOSED to show any causal connetions. they are only there to judge coarses of action when we are NOT aware of the "thousands of variables" which lead to events. ofcourse, i cud sabotage a plane and then get in or choose to fly in the oldest and least best kept planes and lo and behold, more times than not, i will end up dead or have my plane destroyed. that however, does NOT mean that the statistics of plane crashes are wrong, it just means they dont apply to me because i chose to add a CONFOUNDING variable instead of going with the RANDOM variables.
there are also things like spread, mean, mode, median and mean variance to consider. as well as the qi squared etc.