|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Z:
Good stuff. Going back over history and examining thousands of events that
one might study for evidence of coorelation; there will
always be some phenenemon that stand out as appearing to be
causal. Statistically there is going to be SOME event that can be found; as
a matter of chance. The SuperBowl indicator comes to mind.
Chas
-----Original Message-----
From: ztrader <ztrader@xxxxxxxxx>
To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: [RT] correlation vs causation
>On Tuesday, May 22, 2001, 6:14:06 AM, Ketayun wrote:
>
>K> I do find that astro-marketologists often confuse correlation with
>K> causation.
>
>Agreed.
>
>K> I don't see why it matters which came first, the value of learning this
>K> or any science is the ability to use the known to prepare for the
>K> unknown.
>
>True, but first I'd like to see some statistically significant
>correlation. This has been asked for *many* times for *specific*
>'predictions' mentioned on this list, but is still lacking. All we
>ever get is a reference to some old work on a topic that has nothing
>to do with the specific 'prediction' in an RT post. The only good
>astro/stat work has been done by a non-astro person, and for the moon
>only.
>
>Once we have a significant correlation, I don't care if it's caused by
>green extraterrestrials with 13 eyes [has to be a fibo, right?], I'll
>use it too. :-)
>
>ztrader
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|