Quote:
Originally Posted by jlhymb
You're lost in your own sauce buddy ... no one can help you 
Here's the executive summary of our conversation:
Me: google hypothesis testing
You: |
Maybe this will help you (from Wikipedia):
In statistical hypothesis testing, a result has statistical significance when it is very unlikely to have occurred given the null hypothesis.
Another (from Harvard Business Review):
“Statistical significance helps quantify whether a result is likely due to chance or to some factor of interest,” says Redman. When a finding is significant, it simply means you can feel confident that’s it real, not that you just got lucky (or unlucky) in choosing the sample.
You keep saying that this outcome is not statistically significant, but you are grossly misusing that term while at the same time insisting upon my ignorance. So I'm going to try to clarify your argument for you, while showing just how ignorant you really are.
What you intend to argue is that the result is within the margin of error. Since you turned this into some kind of statistics knowledge pissing match, I'll point out that we have no idea what the margin of error is (because we only know what we saw in the video). I'm nothing if not practical, so I'll grant that no car/driver is consistent to within 0.02s around any circuit.
So yes, the results are well within the margin of error, and that means if you re-ran the race, it is just as likely that the M3C would win in any given comparison.
That still is not the same as statistical significance, and continuing to insult me while demonstrating zero knowledge doesn't change that fact.