bady,
@bady@lemmy.ml avatar

Thunderstorms & lightning strikes can severely affect “cloud” computing!

BendyLemmy,
@BendyLemmy@lemmy.ml avatar

‘true fact’.

  • Facts cannot be anything except for true.
  • Anyone who uses the two words ‘true fact’ together cannot be trusted because they know neither the meaning of the word ‘true’ or the word ‘fact’.
Stan,
@Stan@lemmywinks.com avatar

Oh how I miss the before times.

JackGreenEarth,

Facts are just objective statements, which can be either true or false, but whichever they are it is objective and not dependant on the observer.

I mean, it’s a semantic argument, and semantics is subjective, but that’s probably how the people who say ‘true fact’ are defining fact.

koreth,

Counterpoint: True Facts is a great series of humorous nature documentaries.

WagnasT,

Imagine trying to move by riding a unicycle backwards and throwing up through a giant straw. That is how the nautilus do.

Therefore,

I’m so sorry but it’s either/or & neither/nor. Gotta follow through with the negation.

OwenEverbinde, (edited )
@OwenEverbinde@reddthat.com avatar

I don’t know if this counts, since it’s only a “true fact” if you are fine with carefully chosen words and the omission of crucial information…

But the 13-50 stat is dangerously misleading.

You know,

Black people make up 13% of the population, but 50% of the violent crime.

Black people in America do, in fact, make up 50% of the murder arrests according to FBI crime statistics

That much is true.

But certain people tend to use this fact to assert that police officers are far more likely to be killed by black people than by white people. Therefore, the stats that show them brutalizing black people at a higher rate – since they fall short of that 50% number – are evidence that they hold back around black people to avoid appearing racist.

The users of this stat heavily imply black people are more violent and murder-prone, and hence a greater threat. The argument also carries with it an implied benefit to eugenics or a return to slavery (to anyone paying attention.)

But no one using this stat ever explores potential causes for the arrest rate disparity, instead letting their viewers assume it comes from “black culture” (if they are closeted racists) or “bad genes” (if they are open racists).

There’s no attention paid to the fact that black people make up over half of overturned wrongful convictions

There’s no attention paid to the stats further down in that same FBI crime stats table that make it clear that black people make up 25% of the nation’s drug arrests, despite making up close to 13% of the US’s total drug users. (Their population’s rate of drug use is within a margin of error of white people’s rate of drug use). It should be strange that a small portion of the perpetrators of drug crimes make up such an outsized portion of the total drug arrests in this country. But the disparity doesn’t even get a mention.

There’s no attention paid to the fact that more than half of US murders go unsolved, meaning even assuming impartial sentencing and prosecution, we would only know black people committed 50% OF 50% of the murders – 25%. And in a country where 98% of the land is owned by white people and the public defender system is in shambles? Which demographic do you think would be able to afford the best defense, avoiding conviction even when guilty, and ending up overrepresented in the “unsolved murder” category? If only 50% of murders end in a conviction, that means every murderer who walks into a courtroom has a solid chance at getting away with it. Even more solid if the murderer belongs to the richest race. The murder arrest rate by race winds up just being a measure of which demographics can afford the best lawyers, rather than any proportional representation of each demographic’s tendencies.

They mention none of that. The people hawking this statistic intentionally lead their viewers to assume, “arrested for murder” is equivalent to “guilty of murder.” And that 50% of the murder arrests is equivalent to 50% of the total murders. The entire demographic is assumed to be more dangerous.

Rhoeri,
@Rhoeri@lemmy.world avatar

This guy facts.

tom,

Excellent explanation, thanks.

OwenEverbinde,
@OwenEverbinde@reddthat.com avatar

My pleasure.

humanreader,

I’ve seen similar stuff multiple times, often with misquoted statistics. What many miss is that context is as important as stats.

peter,
@peter@feddit.uk avatar

Every single rapist and murderer was found to have dihydrogen monoxide inside their body at the time they committed their crimes, and your friends and family may be using it recreationally without you knowing

JackGreenEarth,

I don’t think something you need to survive can be called being taken ‘recreationally’.

Firefly7,
@Firefly7@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Every year, traffic congestion wastes billions of gallons of gas.

Firefly7, (edited )
@Firefly7@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

explanation, since this one might be more confusing than most:

Traffic congestion does indeed waste gas. However, any place worth driving to is going to have congestion–driving without congestion is easy, fast, and comfortable, so people generally won’t take other options until roads become congested. Thus, congestion actually reduces gas usage overall, because it is only once areas become congested that people stop driving places.

Trying to avoid congestion, on the other hand, usually involves expanding roads, something which increases driving, and makes other forms of transportation less useful/comfortable, thus increasing gas usage overall.

match,
@match@pawb.social avatar

shouldn’t your first post say congestion saves billions of gallons of gas?

Firefly7,
@Firefly7@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

no, since the misleadingly-true fact is still that congestion wastes gas - congestion is cars spending gas on going nowhere, so the gas is wasted

randomaccount43543,

Centrifugal force does not exist

lotanis,

“A laughable claim, Mister Bond, perpetuated by overzealous teachers of science. Simply construct Newton’s laws into a rotating system and you will see a centrifugal force term appear as plain as day.” xkcd.com/123/

bobthened,

It does, it’s just called a different thing. Centripetal force is exactly the same thing as what most people assume centrifugal force means.

Cyna,

It doesn’t exist in an inertial frame of reference. In a non-inertial frame it’s a perfectly valid force

blakeashleyjr,

You are much more likely to die in a hospital than anywhere else.

Gangreless,

I don’t think this one is true, unless you mean it a different way than I’m interpreting it.

www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc1911892#:~:tex…)%20to%20534%2C714%20(20.8%25).

(This is the US)

atheos,
@atheos@lemmy.atheos.org avatar

Wait until you hear the fatality rate for hospice residents

Lubricate7931,

human and chimp DNA is 98.8 percent the same

unknowing8343,

I don’t know the exact number, but, come on! Look at those guys! They are basically hairy humans with a slightly less complex system of communication.

Lubricate7931,

Yep but the point is the 1.2% represent millions of gene pairs and the ones we share are not always present or expressed in the same way. So just sharing genes doesn’t necessarily mean were the same or they do the same thing.

www.amnh.org/…/dna-comparing-humans-and-chimps

Yeah chimps are one of our very few (very very) distant cousins left. But i think they rip more faces off than us

news.com.au/…/1bf74adbd1cf2c9b072577a2abd80253

RIPSync,

Wearing your seatbelt increases your chances of dying from cancer.

pizza_pineapple,

How?

CmdrShepard,

You’ll live longer.

GiantRobotTRex,

If you die from cancer you can’t die from a car wreck.

Kingofthezyx,

Other way around, for the purposes of this joke, but yes.

owenfromcanada,
@owenfromcanada@lemmy.world avatar

It increases your chance of drowning, but not for the reason people usually think.

Holli25,

This one is great! Made me think way too much

dQw4w9WgXcQ,

You can see the moon from The Great Wall of China.

JackGreenEarth,

But the opposite is not true! At least, not with the naked eye.

Firefly7,
@Firefly7@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

People on HRT have a significantly higher mortality rate than people not on HRT

davidgro,

This one is great, I absolutely believe that conservatives would (and I’m sure do) pass it around like some profound statement.

suspicious_dog,

I don’t get it… I dumb.

Firefly7,
@Firefly7@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

HRT is short for Hormone Replacement Therapy, a treatment many transgender people use to feel more aligned with their gender identity. It’s been proven to increase mental health, and has a low regret rate. However, it is correlated with higher mortality because trans people overall have a higher mortality rate and HRT is primarily used by trans people.

A more extreme example of the same thing would be “People on chemotherapy have a higher chance of dying from cancer than people not on chemotherapy.” It’s true, but only because people without cancer don’t tend to enter chemotherapy.

wumpus,

HRT was originally used to treat menopausal women at risk for osteoporosis, who are at higher risk due to being old.

I'm aware that transgenders also have a higher than otherwise expected mortality (whether taking hormones or not), but they may not be numerous enough to move the needle against millions of old women.

Firefly7,
@Firefly7@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Dihydrogen Monoxide, commonly used in laundry detergent and other cleaning supplies, is also present in Subway sandwiches

Dirk,
@Dirk@lemmy.ml avatar

It can even be found in unborn babies!

madmaurice,
@madmaurice@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

They even put it into the water supply.

frap129,

FACT: 100% of people that consume Dihydrogen Monoxide die.

__forward__,

Wrong, a mortality of 94.5% has been shown not even close to 100%.

pancakes,
@pancakes@sh.itjust.works avatar

One could say that people who haven’t died yet don’t have a cause of death yet so they can’t be counted.

CompN12,

Newer cars are designed to crush more and easier than older cars.

Gangreless,

I feel like crumple is a more accurate word here

socsa,

The infamous FBI crime statistics are probably the big one

substill,

There is a greater than 5% chance that your death will be someone’s fault.

chtk,
@chtk@feddit.nl avatar

What about the other 5% though?!

substill,

Non-preventable deaths are about 95%.

JackGreenEarth,

If you believe in God, it’s a 100% chance

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • asklemmy@lemmy.ml
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #