"Bad Mathematics" web site?

[Rolfe]

I remember a link from here to a web site devoted to reporting and mocking examples of bad maths and/or statistis in journalism and other published work. I now need that site again, and can't find it. Google is little help, as there seems to be a band called "Bad Mathematics"!

Does anyone have any idea what I'm talking about? And preferably a url?

Rolfe.

[Paracelsus]

Closest thing that I found through google http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/number%20watch.htm
linked from... http://www.austhink.org/critical/pages/stats_prob.html

[BillC]

I remember something along those lines, Rolfe. I'm thinking of a webpage that had statistical fallacies on it, and highlighted one about people being born in a certain month were more likely to get divorced. Was this the one?

Not the site in question, but here is a similar one:
http://members.cox.net/mathmistakes/archives.htm

[Bikewer]

There's a great little book on the misuse of statistics and such in the media called Innumeracy:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0809058405/qid=1120784963/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/103-8445205-2939034

[clarsct]

There are a few 'Bad' websites linked from Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy site. I remember seeing a Bad Mathematics and a Bad Meteorology, but its been a while. Maybe try the links in Bad Astronomy.

[Rolfe]

Originally posted by Paracelsus
Closest thing that I found through google http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/number%20watch.htmThat's the one! Thanks!

Rolfe.

[Jorghnassen]

Originally posted by Rolfe
That's the one! Thanks!

Rolfe.

Honestly, from the FAQ, it looks just like another one of these "if-it's-not pro-free-market-it-ain't-science" site...

[Rolfe]

Originally posted by Jorghnassen
Honestly, from the FAQ, it looks just like another one of these "if-it's-not pro-free-market-it-ain't-science" site... I do take your point. But there was a particular critique of the statistics of a particular scientific paper there that I wanted to access, and I've now found it. Thanks!

Rolfe.

[Jorghnassen]

Originally posted by Rolfe
I do take your point. But there was a particular critique of the statistics of a particular scientific paper there that I wanted to access, and I've now found it. Thanks!

Rolfe.

I have no problem with that. You can often find some good stuff on this kind of site. It just require a careful read, or you'll get annoyed by the connotations of the text. At least I was quite annoyed at the use of "density function" in the case of Poisson ;)...

[Vitnir]

I got annoyed by the biased ignorant and outright stupid section about epidemiology. I followed the trail on the web and eventually found that the same line of thinking were made by Philip Morris in response to the EPAs finding that second hand smoke was a risk for something.

[SezMe]

Even though you found your answer, I can highly recommend the Poulos book that Bikewer pointed to. It is very accessible and loaded with examples showing various fallacies in the media. It is not just a fun read, but is quite educational.

[Rolfe]

Originally posted by SezMe
Even though you found your answer, I can highly recommend the Poulos book that Bikewer pointed to. It is very accessible and loaded with examples showing various fallacies in the media. It is not just a fun read, but is quite educational. Thanks, but I was just trying to find a specific page with a specific analysis of the statistics of a specific paper. I've found it now, thanks to all.

Rolfe.

[Jorghnassen]

Originally posted by Vitnir
I got annoyed by the biased ignorant and outright stupid section about epidemiology. I followed the trail on the web and eventually found that the same line of thinking were made by Philip Morris in response to the EPAs finding that second hand smoke was a risk for something.

Oh I loved the section on smoking. Man, that one was a riot.