I showed where you claimed that a 1.2% rise in ADHD medication use among 20-44 year olds produces an 11% increase in the number of "nones" in the entire population.
If you can't understand how you asked me to explain a claim you made, then you are even dumber than I think you are.
He obviously never claimed it. He was rebuking it and asking you to state your case that it was (and expecting you to fail or back down)
You implied it by staying the correlation was amazing. It's the obvious inference based on what you said and the context. If it isn't what you meant then what was the point of that post? If it was just you providing random facts with no point then your even dumber (or spineless) than I already thought.
You're weird...
Really weird....
And yet he is clearly quoted as the one making the claim.
Is he is stupid enough to believe correlation implies causation?
No, is it yours?
"Correlation does not imply causation"
Only if you are stupid enough to assume that correlation implies causation.
It is simple.
It is not a random fact with no point.
No he didn't, he clearly challenged you to justify the idea (because he thought you claimed it).
Uh he probably believed YOU were that stupid as to think the minor correlation implied causation. Thus the response you got.
Then why are you continuing to misunderstand what to me seems clearly articulated? (Also 1st language English)
So rather than make us guess what you meant or think the right hypothesis is why don't you just tell us? Since clearly you get weird when people try to fill in the gaps of what you don't say.
Only an idiot expects other people to make their argument for them. If someone has a hypothesis the appropriate action is to state what it is and preferably also how you would test it. It isn't to then ask others to guess what your hypothesis is.
But, I never made that claim.
"Correlation does not imply causation"
No, unlike Jose Fly you did not make a claim, only a guess about a hypothesis that you think I might have made.
Perhaps not but it sounded like you were.
No he didn't as it turns out no one made the claim it seems. Just each thinking the other did.
Does the idea you may be mistaken seems alien to you? If someone says to you that you've misunderstood them most of the time you really have misunderstood them.
Well it would have been preferable for you to just tell me but alas you're nothing but a troll it seems.
I'm sure you're familiar with the term "quote mining" but if not I've provided a link.
I posted a graph that showed a rise similar to the graph you posted and said the correlation was amazing.
The Public Religion Research Institute recently released a new study on the rapid rise of "nones" (people who claim no religion) in the US. Some of their findings...
First, "nones" have risen so rapidly they are now the single largest religious category in the US.
This is amazing, given how just a few decades ago they were barely 5% of the population. If that's surprising, just wait! Among adults aged 18-29, 39% are nones.
And where are these nones coming from? They are mostly former Catholics and white Protestants.
Just who are the nones?
Nice to see my group, apatheists, getting notice!
A couple of other interesting tidbits from the report include, 1) people are leaving their religion mostly because they just stopped believing it, and 2) these nones are far more likely to remain nones than previous generations (interestingly, almost 1/3 say they left because of their religion's treatment of LGBTQ).
