P wrote:
Yosinglerct wrote:
smh You're better than this (I think).
First, your list of 16 "rural" states excluded the two states with the highest rural population (ME and VT). It also excluded 6 of the most rural states as defined in the latest census. Hell, you listed Nevada as a rural state and 94% of their population lives in urban areas - the state with the 3rd HIGHEST urban population???? And Utah is on your list - 91% of population in urban areas, the 8th HIGHEST.
Second, most (12) of the rural states (the real list, not yours) have the majority of their population living in urban areas - all are between ~40% and 65%. A much better analysis would be comparing a sample of actual urban areas with rural areas. Not large swaths of states, but perhaps on a county level. The data is out there. Your conclusion is likely to be true, but your work is faulty.
As I stated before, if you want to present a valid model you just can't eye-ball things. You need to actually do research and then provide a valid statistical or mathematical analysis. You've said some good things over the weeks and are at least on the right track, but you have provided far more poor data analysis and your interpretations of the data have little to no basis.
I'll send you on your way with this little spanking and I'll stop critiquing your work. You presented yourself as and "expert" and someone who does this for a living, but it is apparent now that it was a fabrication. But please, if you are going to continue to do this, "work the work."
People come on here to post for various reasons. Some examples include:
Trolls: It amazes me that some folks find it pleasurable to annoy other folks. But clearly many do.
Truth Seakers: There are those who come on here to inform and to be informed. We have several excellent examples on this thread - agip, have to ask...., Fat Hurts, and Citizen Runner. I am sure there are others but I think that these 3 ( one person besides me on this thread will get it ;-) are among my favorites on LetsRun. They usually see the big picture - the forest with the trees as it were. At least they try.
Big Dick Guys: These folks' primary purpose is to show everyone how big their dicks are. They pretty much never are able to see the forest for the trees. Perhaps they are not able to see the forest for their own dicks. The big picture is entirely lost on them. But they are convinced that they have really, really big dicks and they darned sure want to be certain that everyone knows it.
///
So, for you my friend, I will say Dang, you really have a big dick! It is way, WAY bigger than mine. That thing is friggin' GINORMOUS! Heck, if I had a dick that big I'd probably be doing the same thing. Look, everybody! Look how big my dick is!
Huge. Just HUGE!
You keep sucking me into this don't you (pun intended)?
If believing in solid methodology means I have a big dick then call me John Holmes. It's better than stuffing my crotch with tube socks and trying to fool people into believing that I know what I'm doing like you'retrying to do.