There is a saying among statisticians. "Beware the permanent trend."
This person has taken a couple of dots on a trend line and extended those out as if the trend itself has no causes or contributing factors that can ever change.
When I was in high school, I had no job. In college, I got a job that paid about $100/wk. If I connect those two points and extend them to today, I should be making a bazillion dollars a week.
The odds aren't really that large. The odds you share a birthday with a parent are roughly 1 in 182.6.
They calculated these odds just for the mother. That's arbitrary. They also figured in the odds of a mother already being a leap baby, which, of course, has already passed and has no bearing (!) on whether she will give birth on leapday.
Also, most parents have more than one kid. So they get multiple shots at this.
The 2M:1 odds are actually the odds against any mother you meet on the street sharing a leapday birthday with their first child.
What a terrible study. He had a sample of 25 individuals in one location, and from that he's extrapolating a biological, not cultural, cause?!?!?
"Hey, I asked twelve guys in my dormroom if brunettes are hawter than blondes. I will then extrapolate the cause back to when all vertibates had gills."
Don't report this stuff as science. It's one step up from a quiz in Cosmopolitan magazine.
Seven old ladies locked in a lavat’ry.
There were there from Sunday to Saturday.
Nobody knew they were there.
This person has taken a couple of dots on a trend line and extended those out as if the trend itself has no causes or contributing factors that can ever change.
When I was in high school, I had no job. In college, I got a job that paid about $100/wk. If I connect those two points and extend them to today, I should be making a bazillion dollars a week.
Neither you nor 'Geeks are Sexy' is clear on that point.
With those numbers, it would be phenomenally unusual if NONE of them shared a leapday birthday with a parent.
They calculated these odds just for the mother. That's arbitrary. They also figured in the odds of a mother already being a leap baby, which, of course, has already passed and has no bearing (!) on whether she will give birth on leapday.
Also, most parents have more than one kid. So they get multiple shots at this.
The 2M:1 odds are actually the odds against any mother you meet on the street sharing a leapday birthday with their first child.
He had a sample of 25 individuals in one location, and from that he's extrapolating a biological, not cultural, cause?!?!?
"Hey, I asked twelve guys in my dormroom if brunettes are hawter than blondes. I will then extrapolate the cause back to when all vertibates had gills."
Don't report this stuff as science. It's one step up from a quiz in Cosmopolitan magazine.
Also try and pass those tests if your high school is in a depressed urban area and doesn't offer AP classes.
To pretend that all students coming into the test have had equal opportunities is just that. Pretend.
That said, race is no longer convenient shorthand for correcting for missing opportunity.
I'd like to see a score that reflects your gpa over the average gpa of those in your school as one possible factor in an application.
This is just more of Murdoch's sensationalist tabloid B.S.