*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6502
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9120 on: August 13, 2021, 10:16:35 PM »
I've only watched the first 10 minutes of what Tom posted.  But one of the lines of reasoning they used to claim the election was stolen was a lot of people who rarely vote decided to vote this election and that they went out and knocked on their doors and a lot of people didn't answer the door.

This was sufficient evidence that these were fraudulent votes.  The fact that an orange faced maniac would bring out people who rarely vote or the fact that no one in the right mind would answer the door if Mike Lindell was knocking was never mentioned.

Wow.
So the campaign to bring out voters en mass from both sides worked. 

Honestly, that tracks.  So far the losers are nothing more  thsn a series of contradictory motives and reasonings.
"We need every able bodied republican to vote!"
"People who don't usualky vote, voted!!!  Fraud!!!"

"China released a bio-weapon!"
"Masks, vaccines, or any protection from this bio-weapon is evil and I'll never do it!"

"Trump is the president!  He won!"
"Our elections, with Trump and Republicans in power, were easily hacked! We have no way of knowing the true tally!"
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8401
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9121 on: August 13, 2021, 11:04:53 PM »
The bigger piece was the supposed correlation between registered voters and votes cast. He claims that in every county in OH, precisely 83% of registered voters voted in every age group (might have the exact number wrong). He has demonstrably and admittedly used inaccurate data to arrive at this conclusion and hasn’t published his methods either. The most generous thing you can say is that it is interesting, but it’s far from a slam dunk.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 9012
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9122 on: August 14, 2021, 12:14:42 AM »
The bigger piece was the supposed correlation between registered voters and votes cast. He claims that in every county in OH, precisely 83% of registered voters voted in every age group (might have the exact number wrong). He has demonstrably and admittedly used inaccurate data to arrive at this conclusion and hasn’t published his methods either. The most generous thing you can say is that it is interesting, but it’s far from a slam dunk.

You identified the incorrect data though. In order to say that he presented the wrong data, you need the October 2020 data, which you have not provided:

Correct. It looks like he has all the numbers incorrect compared to what appears on PA Dept of State’s website.

https://www.dos.pa.gov/VotingElections/OtherServicesEvents/VotingElectionStatistics/Pages/VotingElectionStatistics.aspx

Not like it matters. Trump has already won.

Is that data from October 2020 like what Dr. Frank used? It doesn't appear to be. You have presented nothing.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2021, 12:17:34 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8401
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9123 on: August 14, 2021, 02:08:46 AM »
Tom apparently thinks you don’t need to analyze the final election data to analyze the final election result. It’s too stupid to be real.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Online Iceman

  • *
  • Posts: 1262
  • where there's smoke there's wires
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9124 on: August 14, 2021, 03:02:22 AM »
Tom apparently thinks you don’t need to analyze the final election data to analyze the final election result. It’s too stupid to be real.

But the "final" data is just the results from the bigcheatTM. So of course looking exclusively at pre election numbers makes sense.

Rama has pointed out the issue of the time the values are pulled from, and listening to him describe the R values for the graphs and compare those to other types  of datasets seemed (to me) to demonstrate the professor's bias. I only watched about 10mins, from where Tom's timestamped video started. Busy weekend so I dont think I'll get around to watching the rest soon.


Re: Trump
« Reply #9125 on: August 14, 2021, 06:04:37 AM »
lol

"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6502
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9126 on: August 14, 2021, 07:43:00 AM »
Tom apparently thinks you don’t need to analyze the final election data to analyze the final election result. It’s too stupid to be real.

But the "final" data is just the results from the bigcheatTM. So of course looking exclusively at pre election numbers makes sense.

Rama has pointed out the issue of the time the values are pulled from, and listening to him describe the R values for the graphs and compare those to other types  of datasets seemed (to me) to demonstrate the professor's bias. I only watched about 10mins, from where Tom's timestamped video started. Busy weekend so I dont think I'll get around to watching the rest soon.

There's only one way to solve this: use the 2012 data.
It was before Trump so its free of election fraud.  (2016 was full of fraud, remember?)

And I'm sure nothing changed in 8 years, so the data should be identical.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Re: Trump
« Reply #9127 on: August 15, 2021, 08:30:52 PM »
tl;dr: i repeated frank's work from scratch today, and it's terrible. perhaps he was once a talented chemist, but he's clearly an awful statistician. his claim that he can predict election turnout is utterly bogus — he simply fits a line to 2020 county level voter turnout data within a state, then says "wow this line predicts 2020 county level voter turnout in this state!" well, no shit.

all the voter data i used can be found here.



the first point frank makes is to show a plot like this and talk about how it's impossible for the registered voters curve to so closely match all the bumps and wiggles of the turnout curve. he also shows a plot of population vs age census data and shows that the same bumps and wiggles are present. he never says why it should be impossible, he just shows and says what are the odds???



pretty good odds, actually. just think about it — are 55-year-olds significantly more or less likely to vote than 56-year-olds? of course not. the voter participation rate doesn't swing wildly over small age differences. so, if there are more 56-year-olds than 55-year-olds, and if the voter participation rate is the same between both ages, then we should expect to see more total ballots from 56-year-olds.

to give some intuition for this, let's imagine that voter participation doesn't vary with age at all; that is, everyone is equally likely to vote regardless of age. here's what frank's plot for hamilton county, ohio, would look like if the voter participation rate were 80%.



in other words, frank's plot isn't showing anything impossible. he's simply demonstrating that the null hypothesis — that voter participation doesn't vary on short timescales — is consistent with his data. 55-year-olds are just as likely to vote as 56-year-olds. nothing surprising there.



next, frank talks about his so-called "key" to predicting voter turnout in a state. he shows a plot like the first figure and says that every county in a state has the same proportion of ballots received vs registered voters. in other words, for every county, the red line has the same proportional difference to the black line. here's an example for hamilton county:



frank says the curve on the right is identical for all ohio counties, but that's not correct. here's the same plot for hamilton and franklin counties. they're similar, but not identical.



he then makes these proportional difference curves for every county in ohio. i was too lazy to download every county voter roll, but here are the curves for a random-ish sample of ohio counties large and small:



here's where shit really goes awry. he fits a polynomial curve to these data (fyi there is absolutely nothing special about a sixth order polynomial), but he doesn't specify how. not a huge deal, i assume he just minimizes mse or rms or some other loss function and fits a curve. the way i did it was much simpler: find the average voter participation per age. lol that is literally all he's actually done. see for yourself:



this is exactly the "6th order polynomial" he shows at around 11:43 of the lindell video. it's just the average voter participation across all age groups. i added the 2-sigma standard error in blue shading to mine, but otherwise they're the same curve.

he concludes by basically saying that this is incredible because you can use this line to predict 2020 voter turnout for any county in ohio — for each age you simply multiply the number of registered voters by the average turnout rate for that age...lmao no fucking shit, dude. you fit a curve to a bunch of data, and now you're acting shocked that the curve fits your data lolololololol. that's not prediction. that's just working forward to an average, then working backward to the original number, all with the same data.

the best part is that in the lindell video he says explicitly that each state has its own curve. the same curve doesn't work for all states. lol so it has absolutely no predictive power whatsoever.

end note: i still am not sure how this information would be useful to anyone who wants to rig the election with fake ballots. the data he and i are using includes the vote tallies. so if the extra votes don't show up in the tallies, then what difference does it make about all these age differences? none of this makes sense. anyone who falls for it is simply failing to think critically.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8401
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9128 on: August 15, 2021, 10:46:13 PM »
Gary is a physicist and if he says it’s dumb, IT’S DUMB!
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

Re: Trump
« Reply #9129 on: August 26, 2021, 01:03:46 PM »
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.350905/gov.uscourts.mied.350905.172.0_3.pdf



or, in other words, "this lawsuit is so without merit that you should be disbarred for bringing it in the first place."

I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6502
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9130 on: August 26, 2021, 02:00:49 PM »
Lol.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8401
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9131 on: August 26, 2021, 02:17:03 PM »
iT wAs NeVeR jUdGeD oN iTs MeRiTs
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Online Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 2751
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9132 on: August 31, 2021, 04:25:34 AM »
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

Re: Trump
« Reply #9133 on: August 31, 2021, 06:39:15 AM »
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-complained-media-spent-weekend-covering-hurricane-ida-2021-8

What a weirdo.
As I said in the other thread, he clearly has a narcissistic personality disorder. If anything isn’t all about him then he can’t stand it.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6502
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9134 on: August 31, 2021, 06:39:53 AM »
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-complained-media-spent-weekend-covering-hurricane-ida-2021-8

What a weirdo.

Remember when he wanted all muslims banned from entering America?

Dave remembers.... Republicans... Not so much.

The mental gymnastics people need to keep up with this guy.  At this point their brians must be a dry erase board.

"Islam = bad"

(1 month later)
"Oh Taliban, which is extreme islam, is good."
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Re: Trump
« Reply #9135 on: September 11, 2021, 02:05:49 PM »
lmao somebody tell me more about how biden is disrespectful because he looked at his watch once


I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6502
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9136 on: September 11, 2021, 03:32:49 PM »
He forgot.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Online Iceman

  • *
  • Posts: 1262
  • where there's smoke there's wires
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9137 on: September 11, 2021, 09:12:09 PM »
Weird how the guy who bragged about getting the tallest building in the city after the towers fell isnt there today

*

Offline Dr Van Nostrand

  • *
  • Posts: 624
  • There may be something to this 'Matrix' stuff...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9138 on: September 11, 2021, 10:25:31 PM »
"Islam = bad"
(1 month later)
"Oh Taliban, which is extreme islam, is good."

Which is pretty much the same thing the Soviet Union said after they got their asses kicked in Afghanistan.
Round Earther patiently looking for a better deal...

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6502
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #9139 on: September 11, 2021, 10:50:16 PM »
Hey Tom..
What's the official word on why Trump not attending the memorial service and instead commenting on a fight is actually good for America and the fight against Terror?
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.