REALITY... FOR US... IS PROBABILISTIC... DETERMINISM IS NOT FOR US.

Wait, that's not the Wisconsin flag?

I think it says a lot about the US when it didn't even occur to me that it wasn't Wisconsin's real flag.

if you google Wisconsin flag, the picture of cheese with blue background actually came up on the fifth row of google images

I am glad I saw this comment because (ignorant of the fact that American states do eveen have their own flags) I thought it was Wisconsin flag:)

technically stolen comment

Aristocat!

Wait, is that why americans are CATholics?

the Furries have entered the chat

A fat cat

Yes.

geryon Yes, but I doubt they have enough money to loose to begin with, so I doubt they'll ever turn into humans. But, this makes me wonder why cats exist in the first place... Were they all humans at some point of time and lost all their money and got really poor and eventually turned into cats? After all those extremely poor homeless people on the streets do behave like cats to some extent already, living in trash, eating from trash cans... Omg! It's very likely they were humans before! Jeez!

according to our GOP's understanding of statistics, of course.

Not realy human, more like turning into "The wolf of wall street"

LOLOLOL

I don't believe you. No one looks up clips from the Simpsons on YT.

@@russellfautheree4650 Hello, I am No one. It's nice to meet you :P

Saaaaame

Yeah I thought it would have something to do with the Simpson's!

Russell Fautheree I actually watched episodes

cant argue with that

The Commenter have you seen a cat? They have their own towers, they get fed every day, and they get to sleep whenever they like

Eat and sleep

More money makes you a cat

rip

@@Optimusskyler the ghost of this user appreciates your paying respects

So that’s why furries are rich

well yeah, do you know how much fursuits cost? it's ridiculous!

@@flameindigo8035 i once purchased vegan leather shoes, for 100 bucks, the moment i left the store i almost fell. The ground was wet and i literally fell at least once. But i donot want to make animals suffer for my convinience. Now i am in the Simpsons paradigm? I am so confused.😂

Paradox is when something that cannot be explained by the universe's physics. For example: If you time travel to the past and kill your father, then you wouldnt be born to time travel and kill your father. That's a paradox

ElTech0 XD cheers

Tristan Overholser I thought so too man

@@vrtris A paradox is just something that doesn't make sense

Paradox is also an unexpected answer to something.

Paradox of paradoxes

just make sure the box's coin flip doesn't make the cats all die anyway

If you put a cat in a box with a poisoned pill, there's a very good chance that the cat won't take the pill. Put a dog in a box with a poisoned pill, and you've got a dead dog.

@@geraldfrost4710 I didn't need to know this

@@ozmel146 what if you’re in a situation where someone forces you to pick between a cat and a dog of which you have to put in a box with a poisoned pill

finally my depression would be useful

Gotta appreciate that Ramiel pfp

you are not sad enough. you need more desparation in your life.

Best angel

Euros 😂

Thus he assumed you were too stupid to understand statistics

Lies, damned lies, and statistics. also Numbers, when tortured, will confess to anything.

@@kraftrichter1599 He was my teacher, not the other way around. Of course he assumed I was stupid.

Statistics are only useless when no detailed methods and assumptions are supplied and the results aren’t properly reported.

@@KP3droflxp That is a beautiful theory, just like communism: It does not work in practice. Name me one statistical study that you know where these problems are not present.

Steven Crowder in a nutshell

I can if I give you money. Then you'll have a cat brain. Also: Checkmate, atheists. Evolution's not real. God just creates different species by paying them. God is loaded.

I have no money. I am not a cat. Ipso facto, hic ergo sum, transit sic gloria.

@@jeffallen55 I didn't know Gloria was sick!

Suspiciously wealthy furries 🤔

Your favorite Haunter :nya intensifies:

Furries

Your favorite Haunter *you're

@@overlordcringe2715 so what

@@Pizzanator-gp2bb q

Alejo Storni somehow

It's science!

Whatever weirdo makes these videos, he needs to take a basic English Literature 101 class so he can come up with less idiotic analogies. The point of an analogy like the cat-money thing is to explain a complicated abstract concept with a much more simple abstract concept. He did the reverse. He tried to explain a complicated abstract concept with a ludicrous and incomprehensible abstract concept.

Bot having money makes you a black cat

Triumvirate888 Or maybe you just didnt get it. I think it was fairly simple. But then again, so are you.

I thought it was the fact that even though Bart is only ten years old he's been bullied by Nelson for nearly 28 years.

no tv and beer make homer go crazy

Now I want donuts

Doh!

No TV no beer make Homer, something something...

Not wrong

See what u did there

he is now* also that's called a "gootraxian"

I tough that was a video about the simpsons

Maaaaarge

Remember the clones of himself from the halloween episode? Oh wait they don't have the belly button nvm

i thought the simpsons paradox was how the show can be on for 29 years and yet bart is still only 10.

I don't really see how that's a true paradox... maybe he's just super tough.

Nope, this has nothing to do with sample size difference. You can get the paradox with enormous samples of millions as well. It's about categorizing data and he even showed multiple cases with the same sample size yet the paradox applies.

Yeah what the hell, he said "aggregate the data" and then proceeded to bin together 1 treated cat and 4 treated people against 4 control cats and 1 person, like wtf u cant do that

@@sairentov 1. You can, you can aggregate data in various ways depending on what you're studying 2. You rarely get perfectly split statistics, so it happens all the time

It has everything to do with sample size. If the sample sizes were equal, the paradox wouldn’t occur. But in the real world when you collect aggregate data you might not know what the different categories are or if they are relevant.

Someone won the lottery

Lol. I didn’t see that coming. You made my day better. Thank you.

The term fat cats makes much more sense with this in mind

Everyone. Go Google image search "chairman meow"

mrrrow? Nyot to rain on nyur parade, but I may be turning into a cat, yet I have nyo wealth to speak of. Meow... Err...

Autism Is Unstoppable You seem to be blaming individual choices while refusing to look for the causes for such choices.

People have free will. There are always going to be more people of a specific group doing a specific thing because people are not the same. For example most nurses are women but most IT engineers are men, this is likely because women have more caring tendencies (because of children) and men have a more logic focused brain.

So that deparments that women prefer are undefunded is someone not a institutional bias?

40% ur statistics ate misleading though

Forfty

Yeah, it seemed so stupid to me; I don't see why he didn't simply give the same explanation as you!

or... maybe you just treat the people and not the cats both win and we good

Thats a simple explanation for a problem that can be much more complicated in real-world statistics. He used cats and people to differentiate the groups. Now try it with men and women, asian and white European, people with blue or brown eyes, or even more subtle distinctions in the population that might be FAR from obvious (people who eat nuts versus people who don't eat nuts - unless you're actually looking for it, you might not even know which question to ask of the sample). He used a crude example to make the point - sometimes its almost impossible to know what differentiates two populations in the sample, so its easy to reach misleading conclusions without knowing the correction (interpretation) is necessary.

why would you count 4 cats if you only observed 1 cat. that would totally screw with confidence interval

​@@benstallone6784 I interpreted it as having a control group. But I don't know what he truly meant by it.

Most comments I'm seeing are actually about being a cat instead of the political bit in there. Actually pretty cool tbh lol

There's nothing political in there though. It's just a fact.

+Hakasedess Yeah, but there are some nasty interpretation of those facts that tend to creep up on youtube. Seems this audience is better than that though.

Except that being financially poor and uneducated is directly implied to be caused by a person's race.... as opposed to the individual choices made by individual members of said race. There are too many poor and stupid members of any race you choose to consider this factual. Just as there are too many intelligent and well off individuals of each race. If you grow up uneducated and poor in America, then your parents suck and are to blame. If you stay poor and uneducated as an adult in America then it is you that suck and are to blame for your troubles.

Well, yes, racists do tend to latch onto it and make it political, that much is true. I think the key is to refuse their racist ideas outright, and with that comes a refusal to acknowledge it as a political issue. That's how I feel on the issue anyway. (Robert Seeley is a good example, how convenient for him to drop by.)

that may be what goes on this youtube channel's tombstone after this fiasco lol

"using arguments against it" - No. They're *defending* themselves with any logical evidence they can think of because they don't want to be personally forced or coerced into a medical procedure. "this helps us arm ourselves" - Another artifact of an *offensive* mentality. You've been engaged with an "us and them" mentality and instilled with a vaguely threatened sense of your own mortality. Any fan of history knows what comes next.

@@glitchdigger Gotta love your absolute confidence in psychoanalyzing a complete stranger on the internet based on a couple words. Get real, fool. You're looking for things that aren't there.

bruh 💀

Cov. Vaccines weaken your immunity, thanks, statistics.

Last week I went to a lecture that talked about how statistical data can be misleading in how if 0.1% of vaccinated people die of COVID and 1% of unvaccinated people die of COVID but 95% of people are vaccinated then it'll look like 60% of COVID deaths are from people who are vaccinated and will then be misinterpreted to mean that the vaccine is harmful when it isnt

Hello fellow planet.

The Earth wrong, this video is not a month long, it's only minutes long

yes but there is only one physics a month

The Earth Fresh air whats next? The rain?

i wish these vids were a month long

Wow! That is actually really accurate.

I CANT STOP LAUGHING

how could it bring up the average if the average is 89

@l1mbo69 It's because it's still greater than my test average. For example, imagine if my test grade is weighted to be 50% of my grade and homework the other 50%. Say I made a 40% on my first test and a perfect 100% on my hw. Then my grade is 70, a C. The next test rolls around and I get a 60%, which is lower than my overall grade. Now my test average increased to 50%, increasing my grade to 75, C+.

@@natejack2292 i fr just somehow completely skipped the classwork part

#triggered

I was disappointed as well. I expect this from junk channels who are intellectually dishonest. It really surprised me to see this. That the comments were disabled in the first 24 hours leads me to suspect there is disagreement within the subscriber base, from whom my experience is that discussion is very civil, even when it gets heated. I came there after the comments were deleted, but if the part2 comments here are anything to go by, disabling comments is a move I did not expect from MinutePhysics. I can do nothing more than wholeheartedly agree with aaron4820. Why not address actual arguments instead of silencing any dissenting voices by dismissing them. If you want the moral high ground, act like it.

I think the part two completely forgot biological average differences between men and women. For example on average men are more interested in things and women are more interested in people. This might be the reason why women don't choose engineering, even if there was no discrimination.

It wasn't forgotten, it was the elephant in the room everyone was pointing out, resulting in the "uncivil" discussion that ended up getting the comment section closed.

"Comments disabled because the discourse failed to remain civil." "I censored you because your response didn't fit my narrative."

Or scary!

They see me rollin' you got that far?

the comment section is hatin

To be fair, blacks in Texas are smarter cause, texas.

yeah i didnt know the flag was cheese.

If the data actually came from an interventional study or something then yeah, it would be indicative of bad design. But the paradox can also apply to data from other sources as well.

I think that it is less bad experimental design and more bad statistical analysis. After all, the data can still be good, but if you use it incorrectly or leave out some details, then you get a problem. Of course, bad experimental design can influence what data you get in the first place so it's not completely innocent either.

So, there are true paradoxes which poke holes in the universes and then there are apparent paradoxes which seem like they poke holes in the universe until you take a closer look. People rarely talk about the former.

As general rule in biostatistics, you should not include in your pool of subjects different species because even in the same specie you have a lot of variability. And it is a bad experimental design because part of the experimental design consist in selecting your group subjects.

@@DrKappaDelta sometimes it can be helpful to look at multiple species in an experiment if you want to know how something affects different species, all you need to do is to keep the data separate between the species when analyzing the data.

They literally said that different results mean different opportunities. Whoever was behind that video clearly has no capacity for reasoning.

Midnight Chemist Blaming biological or genetic differences requires first disproving every other possibility.

seigeengine Evidently neither do you.

InfamousArmstrong Not if there is well documented evidence of differences between males and females based on genes and hormones. Most of the social causes others would cite are so nebulous they are difficult define, let alone find to disprove their influence.

It's liberal BS!

School with better funding are always performing better at IQ test or Test score. Private school have the highest average, Public school with richer residents have better results compared to school in areas where poor people lived.

Why are the poorer white students in the bad Wisconsin schools are still doing way better than the black students in the better Texas schools?

Hoerkelis outliers. Everything above applies in general

There is no data showing what proportion of those white students are poor. Standardized tests don't keep track of socioeconomic status. All we see is that scores of white students are higher overall than scores of black students overall. This is attributed to differences in the distribution of socio-economic status by ethnicity. Here's a study by the NIH (yeah, I know, it's old, but you can find comparable modern ones): www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK25526/figure/a2000af96mmm00042/?report=objectonly Essentially, race can be used as a better consistent marker for test scores because the wealth distributions have a strong correlation with race, which mostly counters the demographic differences between Wisconsin and Texas.

Ned Fred: Actually it seams to be the exact opposite, if you would account for the socio-economic situations, black people would be doing worse then they are now: " After controlling for family income and parents’ education, race uniquely accounts for a substantial share of the variance in SAT scores." cshe.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/publications/rops.cshe_.10.15.geiser.racesat.10.26.2015.pdf

These are not the Simpsons you are looking for.

@@michaelcarter2851 Doh !

None of the data were "stated incorrectly", it's just that you need context and human input for the data to make sense.

I dont know, the one about being richer would turn you into a cat seems like it was stated incorrectly. The proper way would be to have two lines, one for humans and one for cats. Lumping groups together that have differing variables seems like in it self a fault. I see it as the three ring magic trick, It only seems like magic if you cover up the break in the rings with your hand and not show it to people. Its no more magic than this is a paradox just because you choose to hide information that would prove otherwise.

The problem is that in most cases subsets are not as rigidly defined and easily identifiable as these examples, and the issue of how to group/ divide them itself injects a subjective aspect into the data. The decision about which variables can or cannot be 'lumped together' is one of the issues (along with identifying potential causal effects from mere correlative data) this paradox is based upon. Unfortunately the nature of statistics makes it more and more useless smaller the groups under study are; but fortunately breaks in resulting data lines can show where previously unidentified significant variables occur. This is why science isn't just a one-study-and-we're-done project.

@@BoojumFed is exactly correct. The issue is actually even more generic than this because the number of groups overall can be manipulated to tell very different stories. It gives political pundits the option of finding the story that they want to tell buried in the data.

Gadiel Nathan Arriesgado - he deviated from the physics and began sharing his political views, of which enough people disagreed with.

I'll never be a cat, but I'm statistical outlier with how happy I am based on my, intentionally limited, monetary wealth. :)

Meowgratulations!! you were never alone!

Len Frantora cats are happy because cat videos make people happy

I like cats.....For eating! Lol. >^..^

*was ... LEN CMON GET YOUR SH*T TOGETHER

a very smart cat!

A copycat !

#IllumikittyConfirmed

Valuing equal results instead of equal opportunities is always oppressive. Shame they seem to think they're the same thing, as per them saying as much in their second video.

Biases aren't necessarily a BAD thing. There IS a bias for women to pick certain fields and males to pick other fields, and it's undeserved to some point, but it's also very understandable too - more women would pick English to STEM, and that's not a bad thing. The point of the video was that that aiming for a 50%/50% rate actually favours a group because of the stats being misrepresented, and valuing equal results doesn't work when you don't understand the stats and assume the bias is where it's not. And while it's wrong to force your female child to go for a STEM degree because feminism, if your child actually wants to become an engineer it's equally wrong to force them into a shitty art degree. I don't understand why all the incels and gaters rage, given if anything the video shows that feminist equity theories don't work because they're predicated on flawed interpretations. Get laid already dumbasses.

Well, we already know employer biases exist. As an example, there were studies where resumes were left unchanged except the name being changed from a white-typical name to a black-typical name, resulting in lower acceptance rates for the same credentials. In the absence of any political goal, profit-motivated companies would try to use some method to avoid this bias since they otherwise would be passing up good employees for bad reasons, and losing low hanging fruit to their competitors.

I believe I've heard of this study before, however, you must call into question what classifies something as a "black/white-typical" name as that in and of itself is a racial stereotype. Also, I'm curious what the metrics would be, what companies they consulted and other factors. Wouldn't the researchers have an obligation to reveal racial biases to companies being tested themselves if not the public? I'm curious if you have a link to it so I can take a look. Another aspect you have to consider is job-culture fit. Some companies, though they might like the employee and they have all the right credentials, might not like or mesh well with other workers regardless of their background. And even beyond that sometimes people don't work well with coworkers they can't relate with. Anyway, my point being that while diversity of a workforce is important, it's more important that a team works well together and that its members are competent enough for their roles. At least that's what investors look for in smaller, startup companies. They don't care as much about the estimates as they do about how solid the team is and what they've already achieved.

Yeah I don't understand. The first half of that video shows that women are actually given more oportunity than men per individual department (revealing that this is indeed a case of simpson paradox), only to later assert that women have less opportunity than men (!!!)

Very disappointing, that sort of behavior is part of the cause for why people fail to have honest discussion on sensitive subjects, it's the definition of regression.

Drunken Hobo You're not supposed to think about leftism, you're supposed to listen and believe.

He simply said that because there was no bias overall in the admission process, then the gender roles in society by definiton is what causes the apparent bias. That is the truth. However, whether or not this societal bias is a "problem" that needs "solved" shouldn't really be a discussion on minute physics. This is in the realm of politics and opinion.

Andrew Whiteman it really doesn't need to be solved, people apply to subjects they like and that shouldn't be changed by quotas etc. Also, as far as I know, women aren't driven out of STEM by men.

Andrew Whiteman If he's making any kind of extrapolation of the data and giving his opinion in the video, I don't think you can fairly argue that the discussion "doesn't belong on a minutephysics video." To me, it looks like unnecessary censorship, and while it's obviously no legal offense, it still greatly degrades the respect I have for the people behind the channel. It's one thing to express your potentially inflammatory opinion, it's another entirely to hide from the flames.

@Simon Dewitt The more it gets renewed the worst it gets. So many paradoxes...

glad I wasn't the only one

This comment!!

My main take away from this video is that non-white people are poor and stupid. I don't agree with that, but the video implies it.

I was going to say exactly this. So the medicine is effective.

Kuroji so you like being dumb with no brain

DankMan Cats have brains and they're pretty smart. So what you said is pretty damn ignorant.

i dont mind behig rich and happy as long as i can be a cat

Say "DankMan".... lmao

what if you can only be a depressed rich cat :(

why would you stay sub'd to a science channel that doesn't believe in science?

i feel almost the same but i would be ok with an apology and just *STICKING TO PHYSICS, MINUTEPHYSICS* ffs

If the best comment is aroudn "Oh we commenters dared to criticize holy cow of feminism, how could we?", who would not turn off comments?

Me too. And usually the comments can get fiery, but always stay polite (except the 0.1% trolls you get everywhere).

More like 0.1% of polite comments and 99.9% of trolls.

Because everybody who disagrees with you is a troll.

Agreed. Would have been nice to have a debate with some people. Even if they disagree. And banter is nice. He should grow a thicker skin and re-open the comments.

not because everyone disagreeing is a troll but because this is the internet where the majority are either A. quite rude for a polite but fiery debate or B. complete trolls. And let's not forget that there are also people who agree with you but use bullshit arguments. An example: I was in a debate once about the problems of islamic refugees in germany (yeah, I live in germany). Basically it was me and some other guy versus the whole rest (a wonder it stayed polite). While I tried to make the argument that it's basically impossible to distinguish a peaceful muslim with a terrorist and that the religion in itself isn't "peaceful" at all, everything my partner talked was how "german culture" and "german values" were endangered by it (basically what every idiot would argue). Guess which arguments were debated and which were dodged by doing so. (also, don't trust edited comments)

I thought that's the whole point of Nutrition Science.

In fact, this whole video just seems like you are drawing conclusions without enough data or drawing them incorrectly.

That's the whole point of the video! The examples with cats and humans are meant to make it obvious that you can't just add together members of different groups. But the problem is that everyone is unique, so there are no clearly defined groups of people. In a real experiment it's not always obvious which factors are important, and you can also get incorrect results from splitting groups that should be counted together. What if the groups were something trivial like eye color? If a treatment heals 1/1 brown eyed person but kills 99/99 blue eyed people, do you think we should treat the groups separately and conclude it works 50% of the time?

Reddles37 that example does make more sense. So basically the point of the video is that mistakes are made in statistics and they are supposed to be more complicated than in the videos? That just seems like something i assumed, but that might be because I have taken stats courses before.

That's the point. The danger lies where you don't know the distinction between "cats" and "humans" exists, so you lump them all together and end up with "Treatment is Bad."

@@heftig0 Then it's not a paradox, right? Maybe I'm just stupid and that's what the whole video was about

@@ide8876 The "paradox" in this problem isn't a classical paradox like the grandfather paradox. This type of paradox, I think so at least, would be a "Falsidical Paradox" while something like the grandfather paradox would be classified as a antinomy paradox. Basically, there are multiple definitions to paradox and a paradox isn't always something that can't be solved. Just a problem that looks impossible to solve. The paradox here is that the information contradicts itself when viewed from different angles, IE looks impossible to get a proper conclusion. If you want to know more about paradoxes, I believe one of the Vsauce channels has a video on them.

You're totally right, because you have 4 humans and 1 cat or 4 cats and 1 human the percentage isn't right

Ah you beat me to it. I should have read down before replying.

yeah the first example is bs

Ok now I understand about the first part of the video after reading your comment.

Well you wouldn't want anyone fighting any biases around here now would we, minutephysics?

the comments made a better argument than the video and that scared him

Karolis haha. Well put

Karolis "science"

Graztriton maybe people there didn't agree enough with his politi- i mean physics...

lmao graztriton, and here i thought string theory was controvers-i mean bullshit

P3rformula exactly and isn't science supposed to be politically free unless in political science and in examples

lol the answer to your question is right here in the comments. he doesn't want to have to deal with derogatory behaviour

Because he is biased.