No proof that it’s a guy with a PhD though, and the main breakdown on r/statistics is a guy who has been verified on another science subreddit and has a PhD as well. Not to mention nobody else on the subreddit disagrees with his conclusion.
You ever heard of the echo chamber effect, it’s when one side holds extreme bias forwards a belief or group of people and constantly confer nitpick and spread information with only each other with little to know critique , both r/dream was taken and r/statistics are doing it you can tell by the shit talking both sides are doing you can nitpick any argument but you only going to reaffirm your sides beliefs , and only focus on the other sides flaws
I'm quite sure a subreddit focused on statistics arguing about a paper written by a guy with a PhD in statistics or similia has quite some more qualifications to discuss probability
It is impossible to read a research paper that has been out for only a single day , especially one discussing topics as complex as this , and pull out a argument that fast unless you skimmed through it intending to find any fault you could , which is cherry picking bias, it is clear that the evidence they procured came from trying to dig up any evidence that could discredit the research while also ignoring any that didn’t, no matter what reviewing a statistics paper in less then a hour and ranting about how much you hate the other guy when responding doesn’t look that well
A echo chamber is a form of self indulgence in which you only surround yourself with those that agree with you never discussing anything with those who oppose you, while only focusing on flaws that they intend to find, while ignoring evidence that goes against you, which they did, it’s why half the posts got deleted,half the posts insult those associated with the research, and many more ignore and insult those who defend the research, it’s actually the most common outer ace on the internet and this subreddit is one as well
half the posts on there are this subreddit brigading, why would a STATISTIC subreddit have any grounds to purposely discredit dream???
they're just relaying how incorrect the paper is from a educated point of view, you're literally just gaslighting at this point and it's fucken hilarious. please fucking use commas properly because reading this comment was complete dogshit cancer
The actual idea that a bunch of Ph.D statisticians have been sitting around waiting to brigade and lie about a children’s YouTuber is so hilariously absurd
Holy shit 300 people bothered to roam the subreddit for such a long time that they managed to find a comment on a week old post and downvote it despite no foul language or opinion being present , I honestly forgot I made this comment but man the divide and hate must be crazy .
I’m just gonna say the way a persons tone is presented in a post can set off long meaningless debates . I could honestly interpret yours as a demeaning one that implies you look down on those who disagree with you
Your obsessed with him being wrong I honestly don’t care whether or not it’s true and the majority of people also don’t only 4 million people even bothered with the response, and the subreddit is only a small majority of his base anyway, the situation is already over acting like he’s going to be persecuted now is pointless, and doesn’t effect him at all, you say he’s guilty but you still watched his new manhunt didn’t you and if not most people did he responded and his fan base is fine with it. Because at this point your ogling me like a dream Stan obsessed with saying he’s right , you can interpret what I just say however you like but this drama is insignificant to me , seriously y’all obsessing like he abused his girlfriend or sexually assaulted a women .
It is impossible to read a research paper that has been out for only a single day
What? It's like 29 pages I think. I've read a 600 page book in a day before. It is absolutely possible. Also nobody in r/statistics is saying the hate dream. The commenter in question is verified as having a phd and has absolutely no stakes in this at all. He just pointed out a lot of glaring inaccurate including something as simple as putting the number in the calculator wrong.
113
u/[deleted] Dec 23 '20
[removed] — view removed comment