A Quote by Thomas Sowell

All too often when liberals cite statistics, they forget the statisticians' warning that correlation is not causation. — © Thomas Sowell
All too often when liberals cite statistics, they forget the statisticians' warning that correlation is not causation.
Olympics are three times more likely to be employed than people of a similar age, ethnic and socioeconomic status who have not been participating. It's a correlation, not a causation as far as the statisticians go, but the fascinating question is; Is there something in participation in sports, in community-building, confidence building, self-image-building, strength building, social networking - that greatly enhance employability?
If ... we choose a group of social phenomena with no antecedent knowledge of the causation or absence of causation among them, then the calculation of correlation coefficients, total or partial, will not advance us a step toward evaluating the importance of the causes at work.
Correlation is not causation.
I'm very familiar with how people can confuse correlation with causation.
Don't confuse correlation and causation. Almost all great records eventually dwindle.
Statistics is, or should be, about scientific investigation and how to do it better, but many statisticians believe it is a branch of mathematics. Now I agree that the physicist, the chemist, the engineer, and the statistician can never know too much mathematics, but their objectives should be better physics, better chemistry, better engineering, and in the case of statistics, better scientific investigation. Whether in any given study this implies more or less mathematics is incidental.
I have never been in a bad mood and near a beach ball at the same time. Causation? Correlation? Or fate?
It's often the case that great artists - people like Bruce Springsteen - tend to pick up the subterranean rumblings of profound social change long before the economic statisticians notice them. Changes start long before they become statistics.
Correlation doesn’t imply causation, but it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing ‘look over there.’
You're trying too hard to find a correlation here. You don't know these people, you don't know what they intended. You try to compile statistics and correlate them to a result that amounts to nothing more than speculation.
We should be cautious about embracing data before it is published in the academic press, and must always avoid treating correlation as causation.
The big mystery of Big Data is causation versus correlation.
According to the most trustworthy statistics the number of adult Dullards in the United States is but little short of thirty millions, including the statisticians.
Biases and blind spots exist in big data as much as they do in individual perceptions and experiences. Yet there is a problematic belief that bigger data is always better data and that correlation is as good as causation.
Those who use 'Correlation is not the same as causation' as a magic incantation to dismiss all fact-using professions are fools holding a lit match in one hand and an open gas can in the other, screaming, 'One has nothing to do with the other!'
I am warning my people, but I'm also warning Iran, and warning Saudi Arabia, and warning China and Russia and Europe. We are at the end of this world.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!