Difference between revisions of "Talk:925: Cell Phones"
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Nah b', it's 2000.{{unsigned ip|76.67.97.246}} | Nah b', it's 2000.{{unsigned ip|76.67.97.246}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::The real problem with the graph is that it makes it look like cancer rates have increased from near-zero levels to way higher since 1970, until you actually read the Y axis and see that it's gone from about 400 (per 100,000) to about 475. This is an increase of only 18.75%, as opposed to the visual appearance of a 300% increase. Hats off to Black Hat!! [[Special:Contributions/108.28.72.186|108.28.72.186]] 01:18, 7 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 01:18, 7 August 2013
On first read I thought the joke is that the cell phone graph shape (somewhat) closely mimics the shape of the cancer graph, including the part where it begins to level off - implying that one linearly correlates with the other, with a 20 year delay (a typical time it takes for cancer to manifest, except in this case it's backwards). ultramage 14:17, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
That and the fact the graph is out by a scale factor of 1000 is always a fun way to screw over how the statistics look. 82.16.27.115 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
Nah b', it's 2000. 76.67.97.246 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- The real problem with the graph is that it makes it look like cancer rates have increased from near-zero levels to way higher since 1970, until you actually read the Y axis and see that it's gone from about 400 (per 100,000) to about 475. This is an increase of only 18.75%, as opposed to the visual appearance of a 300% increase. Hats off to Black Hat!! 108.28.72.186 01:18, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
