Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2
Such methods may not establish cause and effect, but to do show it's existence, sematics perhaps. Let's imagine that for some strange reason F=ma was not known nor understood and it was not obvious that better power to weight = faster on a track. This regression would show such cause and effect. Sure a formula is a better indication of cause and effect but statistics show the same thing as the formula.
|
In the case of the car, common sense tells us that the performance depends on physical characteristics and not the other way round.
But if you take a different kind of retrospective study, such as the one published today that proved a significant correlation between obesity and malignancy, proof of the correlation does not determine cause and effect. Does being fat increase the risk of cancer? Or do people with cancer get fat?
I did say that arguing about stats was sad, so I'll leave it at that...