koow Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 I said that "it's the first thing that shoud be looked at". I never said it was the explanation. So I never had "the view" that sex ratios in the gen. pop. are "the explanation". I said it's the most basic question that should first be looked at (obviously..it's such a trivial and obvious point)....and I suggested it COULD BE the explanation (pending observation of the numbers). (If it was found that the age-specific sex ratios for the university and non-university populations were similar, then it would probably make any other questions "kim" has about the issue meaningless, since in that case there probably are more "non-university females" than males as well). I then stated, after seeing the numbers, "there are more females than males in gen. pop. at that age". I did not state it was the explanation for the possibly higher numbers of females in universities...i have no idea what those sex ratios are. I suggested it COULD be the explanation (and if it was, it would render most other questions meaningless), pending more detailed data collection/analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faustian Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Regardless, you were still rude and obnoxious. Furthermore, having insulted others about their academic background, you failed to cite your own. Odd that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koow Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 "Koow, you have a solid grasp of numbers... but not such a solid grasp of interpolation. The ratio for university aged adults could be above 1 and still be consistent with the numbers. .... p.s. That's very obvious. The very broad age groups presented by previous posters (for example, "the one who was did good by kim" posted data from "wikipedia"....i don't use wikipedia as a data source and never will!!) are fairly meaningless for this issue....way too broad. I am NOT the one who presented any of these numbers. I did not use any of these numbers to support my claim that there are more females and males in the university aged population. I have access to other data. There are more females than males in the gen. pop. at the "university ages". But as i said in the other post of 5 minutes ago....I don't know whether or not the "gen. pop. age-specific sex ratios" are the arithmetic explanation for the sex ratios in universities, but it COULD be, and it should be the first question that comes to mind. If there are ALOT more females than males in universities, then it's obviously NOT the full explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartThais Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 The very broad age groups presented by previous posters (for example, "the one who was did good by kim" posted data from "wikipedia"....i don't use wikipedia as a data source and never will!!) are fairly meaningless for this issue....way too broad. The data is only "fairly meaningless" if you have never used your brain for inference. Want me to spell it out for you, doctor koow? Try to fit a monotonically decreasing curve that starts at 1.05, ends at .83 and averages .98. What conclusions can you draw about the first 1/4 of that curve? It's lower-bounded by .98 and it is most likely at or above 1.0 unless a whole bunch of men are suddenly dying at the tail end of the curve. In any case, from that "fairly meaningless" broad data, I've pretty much ruled out sex ratio explanations as the intellectual equivalent of looking for misplaced keys in the freezer. But then again, maybe I just haven't had as much edumication as you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koow Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 "Try to fit a monotonically decreasing curve that starts at 1.05,............." A pointless exercise (and a misuse of linear interpolation). But I'm impressed you know what interpolation is. But you don't know much about when to use and when not to. Garbage in garbage out. By the way...is there also a "botique interpolation" technique i should know about? (which I assume is interpolation that has "some kind of angle"? Your time would be well spent continuing your quest for the answer to your question "are there squirters in bangkok". Try this: Take a random sample of girls at Nana and calculate the rate of squirters there. Then do the same at SoiCowboy. Now all you have to do is interpolate to know the probability that EACH GIRL standing on sukumwit between nana and SC are squirters, depending on their distance. Now, get to it!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartThais Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 Professor koow, when you googled 'interpolation' you forgot to read the part that said not all interpolation is linear. That's why I specified monotone curve instead of, um, straight line. Normally, I'd let that slide but you did just rake Sakai over the coals for using the term Gender Ratio instead of Sex Ratio. Oh and even though you've edited and re-edited your last three posts here, you still managed to spell "botique" wrong. Anyway, back to your regular programming of whores and squirters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koow Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 "Oh and even though you've edited and re-edited your last three posts here, you still managed to spell "botique" wrong. " I love watching people get desperate for "comebacks". You really do need to learn something about the garbage in garbage out nature of data analysis in general. The two endpoints are important, for example. Using an endpoint that you assume is the midpoint of a HUGE, heterogenous interval is, well...ridiculous. But keep on pretending that I had to "google" interpolation....if it makes you feel you have a "comeback". Keep looking for those spelling errors too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KimDidMeGood Posted June 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 Here's your garbage: Table 094. Midyear Population, by Age and Sex Thailand/2000 Total________ 98.1 0-4__________ 104.9 5-9__________ 104.5 10- 14_______ 103.7 15- 19_______ 102.5 20- 24_______ 103.8 25- 29________ 99.8 30- 34________ 96.6 35- 39________ 93.9 40- 44________ 94.1 45- 49________ 94.9 50- 54________ 95.5 55- 59________ 94.2 60- 64________ 91.6 65- 69________ 89.2 70- 74________ 87 75- 79________ 79.8 80+___________ 67.7 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Data Base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTO Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 Excellent - So that's why there are 4 times as many girls at uni than boys - Good work Kim - glad we did that Why would anyone think that sex ratio had anything to do with such large number disparity? Obviously other issues at play Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KimDidMeGood Posted June 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 (..) there are 4 times as many girls at uni than boys - Good work Kim - glad we did that Err... maybe that figure is true in some specific universities but the overall situation is not that huge, it's about 52% females. So unless there are 28% katoeys, 4 times is very exaggerated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.