home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!decwrl!access.usask.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!ciit85.ciit.nrc.ca!brandonu.ca!mcbeanb
- From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: SOME USEFUL STATISTICS
- Message-ID: <1992Jul30.164024.2024@brandonu.ca>
- Date: 30 Jul 92 22:40:24 GMT
- References: <q0cm=rj.ray@netcom.com> <BrpuyA.A5M@cs.dal.ca> <!mvxtjk@rpi.edu> <1992Jul26.132600.1986@brandonu.ca> <cd1xrwn@rpi.edu>
- Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada
- Lines: 43
-
- In article <cd1xrwn@rpi.edu>, cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
- >
- > mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:
- >
- >>In article <!mvxtjk@rpi.edu>, cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
- >>>
- >>> franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve "edified" Franklin) writes:
- >>>
- >>>>The U.S. death rate for the unborn CHILD is ~100% in all abortions
- >>>>recorded.
- >>>
- >>> This statement is not correct.
- >
- >>Sure it is, he said approximately 100%. The accuracy depends entirely
- >>on the number of significant figures he was thinking of.
- >
- > McBean, I go to an engineering school.
-
- Whoopty shit, I have a BSc with a major in chemistry (whoopty shit).
-
- > Try coming here and taking
- > a test and writing ~ in front of all your answers. Try defending
- > yourself by saying "Hey, you didn't specify the number of significant
- > figures!" You might give the prof a good laugh, but you'd still
- > fail.
-
- If there was no statement of the number of significant figures, then you'd
- be entirely correct. You can be just as vague as your test. Besides that,
- Mr. Franklin was not being tested in the first place. He made a very
- broad approximation.
-
- > Franklin's statement is just inaccurate, sloppy math.
-
- It was neither of the two.
-
- >>Brian McBean
- >
- > -rocker
- > are you one of those liberal arts majors?
-
- PUHLEEEEEZE! :-)
-
- Brian McBean - McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
-