Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by 0x445442 2347 days ago
So why are we to draw any conclusions one way or the other based off a data set that's statistically insignificant compared to the age of the earth?
3 comments

Does the dataset before the dawn of agriculture and permanent settlements matter that much?

The conversation largely revolves around flooding and food production.

The earth will be fine, itll bounce back. Billions of people however, could be displaced from their homes as their land floods, or starve if food production and distribution is destroyed. The Earth had maybe 1 billion people 200 years ago. Now its at 7.5. Unprecedented doesnt begin to describe the migration that would occur if the Earth lost its coastal cities.

What I dont like about this animation is that giant land masses like the USA and Russia get the same treatment as tiny countries. The average temperature of the USA is a lot less useful than if it were broken down by region.

How do you compare a statistical significance to an age?

Like how does p<0.01 compare to my age (38 years)?

If you got a fever tomorrow, would that be statistically insignificant?