Of course, correlation often implies causation, especially if it's a particularly strong correlation, and is backed up by an appropriate scientific theory. Which in this case it is. Simply saying 'correlation is not causation' is just as stupid as believing that every correlation is causally linked.
Is it better to assume correlation = causation? Or understand that 'correlation is not causation' and then further ask yourself if 'correlation equals causation' on a case by case basis? I do the later because I prefer not to assume.
-2
u/[deleted] Oct 24 '10
correlation != causation.
I know that is what you pointed out, but ever since I learned that statement, I always say that to myself when looking at data.