Well we can never know whether what we observe is due to chance/how closely our observations of a small part of a population map to the whole population.
I don't know how Steve arrived at his figures, but I'm sure if he were to explain, then the method would be logically and mathematically sound.
Well we can never know whether what we observe is due to chance/how closely our observations of a small part of a population map to the whole population.
I don't know how Steve arrived at his figures, but I'm sure if he were to explain, then the method would be logically and mathematically sound.
If you were to shoot a shotgun into a flock of birds and you knew roughly the size of the flock, you could look at the ratio of dead red birds to green birds and construct a bell curve of possible ratios of red to green in the actual flock. If your ratio is 20 to 1 red to green, it becomes increasingly less likely that the actual ratio in the flock is the ratio (15, 12, 9, 5 etc to 1) as you move away from that number.
Well we can never know whether what we observe is due to chance/how closely our observations of a small part of a population map to the whole population.
I don't know how Steve arrived at his figures, but I'm sure if he were to explain, then the method would be logically and mathematically sound.
If you were to shoot a shotgun into a flock of birds and you knew roughly the size of the flock, you could look at the ratio of dead red birds to green birds and construct a bell curve of possible ratios of red to green in the actual flock. If your ratio is 20 to 1 red to green, it becomes increasingly less likely that the actual ratio in the flock is the ratio (15, 12, 9, 5 etc to 1) as you move away from that number.