this post was submitted on 03 May 2024
716 points (97.7% liked)
Funny: Home of the Haha
5696 readers
1219 users here now
Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.
Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!
Our Rules:
-
Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.
-
Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Other Communities:
-
/c/TenForward@lemmy.world - Star Trek chat, memes and shitposts
-
/c/Memes@lemmy.world - General memes
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I meant statistically significant. Like in "how much chance is there that this difference was due to randomness ?". There is statistcal tests for that.
Afaik, there are only two dead Boeing whistle blowers, so you can't form any sort of actually meaningful statistics on their life expectancy due to the small sample size. However it's enough to say "that looks very suspicious and I think these 'suicides' should be investigated as murders", and I think the meme is just meant to draw attention to that.
Yeah this wasn’t exactly a scientific endeavor on my part.
Seriously !? Why is it so weird that I make a statistical joke on a meme that makes fun of statistics XD
Didn't see this till I posted the other reply. I'd say your first one looks enough like a joke, but the second followup makes it look like you're serious.
I mean, since the sample size is rather small, it's not really possible to do a reliable statistical analysis on Boeing whistleblowers,.
As a straight percentage, however, they DO suddenly die in their early 40s much more often than the general population, so might not be total happenstance 🤷
A-are you asking for accurate statistical analysis in c/funny?
Yes XD I realised my mistake now