NancyLebovitz comments on Open thread, 23-29 June 2014 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (190)
There are at least two more possibilities: A and B are unrelated, but happen to be in sync for a while, and the data was collected wrong in some way.
I'm choosing to ignore that possibility to clarify the exposition of what I think is going on. Problems like that are what I'm referring to when I preface:
Even if we had enormous clean datasets showing correlations to whatever level of statistical-significance you please, you still can't spin the straw of correlation into the gold of causation, and the question remains why.
You could say that "A and B happen to be in sync for a while" is possibility 3, where C is the passage of time. (Unless by "happen to be in sync for a while" you mean that they appear to be correlated because of a fluke.)