GardenBanter.co.uk - View Single Post

hugh · 08-11-2010, 08:27 PM posted to uk.rec.gardening

In message ,
writes
On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 21:08:40 +0000, hugh ] wrote:

In message ,
writes
On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 09:39:10 +0000, Malcolm
wrote:

In article ,
writes
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 18:48:42 +0000, kay
wrote:

But many
analyses are simply looking at presence or absence of a species, and
actual numbers are irrelevant to this.

But only in participating gardens. That cannot be extended to whole
populations throughout the country, for the reasons I have given.

Your "reasons" are flawed because you don't (?won't, ?can't) understand
the concept of sampling.

Don't try to make it sound difficult, Malcolm :-)

I think you've hit the nail on the head Malcolm. He doesn't want to see
any answer which doesn't reinforce his preconceptions and he would
appear to know nothing about the dark art of statistical analysis, of
which I freely admit my own knowledge is rather scant.

So why don't you ask Malcolm how sampling in participating gardens
extends to the country as a whole?

That's already been explained.
And at the same time ask him if it matters if the counts are accurate
or not

No it doesn't AIUI.
No one has yet answered this question and Malcolm studiously avoids
it.

I think they have but see my comment in my preceding post.

You seem to persist in asking the same question over and over again
regardless of answers which in my book is the action of a troll so I
won't bother to reply to you again

--
hugh
"Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, Or who said it, Even if
I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason And your own
common sense." Buddha