Gun Rights

Blackflag: Then I'd take the challenge, show him a calculator, and reap the judgments in my favor.

Blackflag: Also the fact that you thought margin of error dealt with the validity of the survey just shows that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
It does deal with it. It doesn't ensure accuracy though.

To be accurate, for example, you would need a perfectly random sample. Which is very difficult, if not impossible, in the real world. The randomness of the sample is the single biggest determinant of the accuracy of a survey, so you should never dismiss it. More so than the sample size in most cases.

The point of all this is - the margin of error in that statistic was nowhere near 100%. You were wrong about that, and ought to admit it.

It does deal with it. It doesn't ensure accuracy though.
Then you were rambling about something completely off topic.

That is what drug addicts and the mentally insane do during discussions.

To be accurate, for example, you would need a perfectly random sample
So if I perfectly survey two random people, you are going to stick by your claim that the survey is a perfect representation of the views of 315 million people?

You are crazy man!

Blackflag: Then you were rambling about something completely off topic.
No, I wasn't. Margin of error is a completely warranted reply to calling the statistic baseless or useless.

So if I perfectly survey two random people, you are going to stick by your claim that the survey is a perfect representation of the views of 315 million people?
With the following caveats:
1. If you run that by a confidence interval, you'll note that your standard deviation is rather high there. So your margin of error is going to be very high too. Probably approaching .45 at a rough guess.
2. Finding 2 perfectly random people to do your survey may be harder than you think.

admin: Note, it's not about perfect surveying, but perfect randomness. As opposed to seeded randomness.

admin: Also, why do I have to explain this stuff to anyone who isn't 13?

No, I wasn't. Margin of error is a completely warranted reply to calling the statistic baseless or useless.
But how did they prove that the survey was accurate.

Hint: They don't. You were talking crock shit.

1. If you run that by a confidence interval, you'll note that your standard deviation is rather high there. So your margin of error is going to be very high too. Probably approaching .45 at a rough guess.
Oh my god, now you revert the definition, which shows that you don't even understand margin of error.

That IS NOT margin of error. God, take some pills man and come back when your sanity does.

Finding 2 perfectly random people to do your survey may be harder than you think
Considering I don't scare them away with mentally insane nonsense, it would be quite easy.

Also, why do I have to explain this stuff to anyone who isn't 13?
It isn't about explaining at this point.

It is about justifying your nonsense.

Blackflag: Merely having a sample size of 1000 does not make it inaccurate is the point. Margin of error calculations do prove that much.

Oh my god, now you revert the definition, which shows that you don't even understand margin of error.
Well... want me to go back and calculate the margin of error on that one?

admin: Mind you, we'd have to go to the more complex version of the formula due to the sample size.

Gun rights? Well ISIS gets guns somehow I suppose.

Blackflag: Preach!