All Big Issues
The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

# Statistics are not inherently trustworthy reliable

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0

Debate Round Forfeited
bman7720 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 8/14/2017 Category: Society Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period Viewed: 648 times Debate No: 103531
Debate Rounds (3)

 Pro I will allow you to lay your argument first.Report this Argument Con I will be arguing against the proposition that statistics are not inherently trustworthy and reliable. I will argue my claim on the grounds of ambiguity of the proposition. It is naive to see statistics as 100% effective in predicting outcomes. Just as it is to perceive them as solid evidence to support stereotypes. For sake of argument, I will stick to inferential statistics as the topic of debate. We use a very common statistic every day. When we look at weather reports we are looking at a calculated measure of chance based upon conditions and trends. We then plan our events around the chance of certain weather events. These chances are adapted to situations as new data is recorded. We know the typical conditions of a tornado and can calculate the chance of certain conditions to produce a tornado by their relativity to optimal conditions. To a more scientific usage of inferential statistics, we can get demographic data from self reported polls. By using voter data collected upon registration, candidates can target campaigns to specific demographics. Especially in local elections, targeting the party you are running for is a very effective method of getting votes. By gathering the percent make-up of voters by party in an area, we save time by judging the chance of the voters to be sympathetic to our cause.Report this Argument Pro Statistics in weather are unreliable in many areas themselves, around here (Colorado) it is common to expect snow and have 80 degree weather, or the inverse, and in general the reliability of weather reports depends very much so on location, and how it affects the measurements. For scientific and political uses, statistics are far to easy to manipulate. It is perfectly possible, and common, for statistics to be taken advantage of (Purposely or not), by using a small sample size, a sample from a small area, manipulative wording of questions, or not enough answers. Often, whether done purposely or not, these things are done, and cause a poll taken to be totally inaccurate to the truth. Not to mention random chance, with the possibility of being entirely wrong no matter what. No matter what kind of statistics are being recorded any of these things are likely to affect the results, to show that we shouldn't rely on or trust statistics.Report this Argument This round has not been posted yet. This round has not been posted yet. This round has not been posted yet.
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Arganger 3 years ago
Yes.
Posted by MyNameIsSean 3 years ago
So your stance is that statistics aren't always right?
Posted by MyNameIsSean 3 years ago
So your stance is that statistics aren't always right?
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.