Ha! I really dislike this phrase, “are you awake yet?” It’s right up there with, “are you starting to understand?” The meme, the article, the comment thinks it has found the magic knowledge, the top secret clue that links it all together and provides a grand revelation.
See the problem is I have “been awake” for so long and “starting to understand” for so many years, that really all I’m looking for today a nice hot cup of tea and a hammock in the shade. Rather than be awake, I was kind of hoping to take a little nap, maybe fall asleep reading a good book?
I now have far more knowledge than any human being can legitimately carry around. A young fellow objected to that statement, thinking I was somehow bragging. A bit amusing, but the fact that he thought having more knowledge than you could handle was a good thing, means he simply doesn’t yet.
Recently somebody smart on the internet, (like ‘smart on the internet’ isn’t a complete oxymoron) but recently someone pointed out, “do you ever notice how all the people arguing that correlation does not imply causation are now dead?” Oh, now there’s some dark humor! I do indeed. I have noticed precisely that.
“The phrase “correlation does not imply causation” refers to the inability to legitimately deduce a cause-and-effect relationship between two events or variables….”
This statement was super popular before covid hit and I’ve always hated it. I mean, read it in it’s literal form and it basically a rather clever form of brainwashing. It sounds very highbrow, intelligent, and academic but it basically means you can’t trust your instincts, your lying eyes, or the pattern of events and behavior you see before you. Just trust us instead.
Uh yeah, that would be a big “No.”
The other one we need to toss is, “you’re just confirming your own biases.” Uhm, well yes! I’ve written before about how “confirmation bias” was once a really good thing. In psychology it had to do with thinking positively, with going forth and making good things happen for yourself. In science “conformation bias” might even be called attempting to prove a theory or a hypothesis. Can you imagine not even having a theory to prove or disapprove, proceeding to not want to be judgy with the facts, and finally declaring, oh well, correlation does not imply causation.
Actually one doesn’t even have to imagine such things, we’ve been living in it for several years now.
Naturally no one will take my advice, but I’m going to give it anyway. Confirm your own bias because that’s a good thing and 99.9% of the time correlation does indeed imply causation. Also, find yourself a cup of tea, a good book, a hammock, and take a nap. Life is not for the faint of heart and you need lots of time to relax and recover.
See, there's this thing called biology... 
IB! You’ve done it again! I may just need to reblog your post. Trouble is, the people who might need to read it most, wouldn’t bother to read it. 😂
Sometimes I feel like I’m on my own little island, learning the truth about many matters, while those around me have no clue what’s “really going on” in the world. Then, I read something new that either challenges what I’ve learned since 2016, or confirms it! But look at all the years that have gone by! 8 years!
Have you ever seen that huge “The Great Awakening” boulder graghic? It makes me feel like I’ve been living in a fake “Truman Show” type of existence during my first 61 years of life. It might make one crazy to see & try to study it. Is that what’s happening to me? Nah! I trust in Jesus and know the beginning all the way to the end via the Bible. That truth comforts me; and gets me through all the evil and the lies here in this fallen world called Earth.
At this point, maybe we’re all on information overload? Your advice to rest and “get away from it all” for a while is much needed these days!
I often enjoy sitting out on the patio with my dog Maggie Mae, enjoying the sunshine, warm breezes, birds flying. She looks up and tries to chase the birds in the air; or the annoying squirrel that runs along the fence in our yard! It’s nice, like living in Eden. Then, the construction on the street behind our yard starts up again! 🙄. Oh well…it’s back to reality.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Thank you for your kind words! It all very crazy making, isn’t it? Like the Truman Show, indeed. I suspect many of us are on information overload. We were probably designed to simply enjoy our backyard and interact with about a dozen people. Now our little world has gone global and with TV and social media we are exposed to thousands of people and all their assorted issues.
LikeLiked by 3 people
The problem with “correlation does not imply causation” is that it can work both ways. Big pharma and mainstream medical profession use it to try and wriggle out of ‘Someone was vaccinated and they fell ill shortly after’, whilst stating that injection of vaccines into people has been good for health.
Given that vaccines contain, if anything, toxic substances, it has never been a good idea to poison oneself as one will fall ill or maybe die.
Which is correlation equalling causation of course!
Now to enjoy my mug of tea…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good point about how selective the “correlation/causation rule” can be! Future events that have not yet happened become indisputable proof whereas history and current observations have no basis in fact.
I definitely recommend more tea.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well, A/O, if the drug companies ever need an expert to train them in ignoring and dismissing mountains of evidence based on correlation with causation (among other lines of evidence), you are unquestionably the man for the job.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/reported-paralytic-polio-cases-and-deaths-in-the-united-states-since-1910
LikeLiked by 1 person
I really wish we could just agree on one thing, Josh. The covid vaccine was a brand new, experimental MRNA vaxx with absolutely no mountains of evidence that marked it safe and effective. It had never been used before! There were no long term studies. Even now at this moment in time, not enough time has passed for us to even have enough data on long term effects. We certainly didn’t have it four years ago.
We also had very limited evidence as to it”s effectiveness. Since covid had never been seen before and the vaxx had never been used, it should be self evident that data was no available.
So lies were clearly told. When experts lie to me they lose my trust and now have zero credibility. All the expertise in the world means absolutely nothing when you feel entitled to lie to the general public.
LikeLiked by 3 people
As should be obvious, I’m responding to a comment by A/O, a man who rejects all of the correlative evidence for the effectiveness of vaccines.
This post makes the point that “all the people arguing that correlation does not imply causation are now dead.” A/O doesn’t seem to understand this point at all. Unless he wished to complain about drug companies.
Many different vaccines have been used to prevent illness and death from many different pathogens. Much of the evidence for this can be described as “correlation with causation,” but there are plenty of other lines of evidence as well (e.g., clinical trials). As I’m sure you understood, my use of the phrase “mountains of evidence” referred to the evidence we have for ALL vaccines, not just the COVID vaccine.
But A/O argues against all of this correlative evidence. He argues that all vaccines are always bad, have no value, and have never saved a life. ALL vaccines, not just the COVID vaccine. This is what I am responding to here. Taking ALL vaccines into consideration, vaccines have saved countless lives. Can we at least agree on this point?
You want to change the subject to the COVID vaccine, because you always want to change the subject to the COVID vaccine. There is nothing that I can say that will change your views on this vaccine. I’ve made many comments on this subject in the past, and I don’t see the point in repeating them here.
But I will say that the concepts, principles, and technology behind the COVID vaccine were not “brand new.” Research into mRNA vaccines to treat SARS virus infections began long before 2020. And it’s a bit of an exaggeration to say that “no data were available.” At a minimum, there was clinical trial data available for the specific vaccine that became available in late 2020.
Of course, it was a new vaccine. All vaccines are new at some point in their existence. Everything was new once. And with all vaccines, there is a point in time when we don’t have long-term studies. So, we should never introduce a new vaccine? The Salk polio vaccine was rolled out with no long-term data, either. With respect to long-term, as I’ve said, we’ll see. In the meantime, there are probably thousands of peer-reviewed studies of the COVID vaccine that can be read today. Personally, I like the meta-analysis studies because they look at many studies at once.
You’re very quick to accuse others of lying. But I haven’t seen much evidence to support this. People make mistakes. It doesn’t automatically follow that they were lying.
LikeLike
“Of course, it was a new vaccine. All vaccines are new at some point in their existence. Everything was new once. And with all vaccines, there is a point in time when we don’t have long-term studies. “
We were told it was safe and effective and had been studied thoroughly. We were lied to.
Speaking of correlation and causation you said, “Taking ALL vaccines into consideration, vaccines have saved countless lives.” Yes well, we also had to recall the Swine flu, Rotavirus, Gardisil, Hib, and a whole slew of others over the years. Attempting to imply vaccines have saved lives, therefore vaccines are good, is not an evidence based conclusion.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I’m slowly getting into some frequency to check out some claims I spot in blogs. I had a few minutes to spare so I did check out what you stated, IB, “Yes well, we also had to recall the Swine flu, Rotavirus, Gardisil, Hib…”
I am certainly no medical professional nor do I play one on TV… but in following up with the CDC site, a BBC report, and a couple other historical resources… the Swine Flu mess of 1976 was pretty much a PR fiasco, along with the Swine Flu itself not taking hold anyway. It wasn’t truly a recall of the vaccine of the day. Research since then has supported the likely percentages of getting the very rare Guillain-Barre syndrome would have been a blip had the Swine Flu taken hold. The other three you mention, from the accounts I’ve read, resulted in no recalls. Of course this entire national divide is all about the sources, isn’t it?
Seems to me if the next pandemic brings death and it’s quickly progressing down your street and the only vaccine around has an effective rate to help 75% of the population with the remaining 25% (an appalling rate for a vaccine, btw) suffering some untimely malady as a result of the vaccine… the choice seems obvious. But then again.. it’s all about the CHOICE, isn’t it? Government mandates that the best effect to the population is if everyone takes it.. we naturally suspect government is messing with us and people in power are getting rich with our lives… not to mention we can’t have any dabbling in our “freedom of choice”…. that the Constitution does NOT specifically guarantee, btw. Of course, all this alleged government corruption will be cleared up when Trump wins the election… and we can go back to trusting government again… hopefully by day 2 of his administration. I think he missed that opportunity his first chance he had in office.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Doug, are you trying to say that if some vaxx causes 1 out of four people to suffer from some kind of “untimely malady,” that’s okay because it might still prevent disease in those who survive?
Did you than try to suggest that the government has the right to force this choice on people?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am saying that the nature of the threat at hand.. the crisis of some loathsome disease killing people… quickly… just might dictate an immediate government response. After all, we elect a government to serve to protect us. Not every threat to the existence of this country is some religious zealot with an AK-47. Quite easily it could be microscopic. I think we can all agree that a democracy, and I don’t care what form it takes, will NOT respond well to a crisis of immediacy to save lives. Democracy takes time because it’s design to do so. Sometimes it’s prudent, if not the only solution, to defer to a singular “captain of the ship” to regain control in a crisis situation. One guy or one entity calls the shots. Democracy by it’s nature is NOT set up to respond to impending, immediate advancing threats where there’s no time to sit around and debate policy. And when I say “crisis” I don’t mean some “Pearl Harbor” thing. I am talking an unrestrained event spreading through society quickly and killing people as it advances, where’s there’s little or no time to respond. While you might want to sit around and let nature impose some “herd immunity” (which in itself will takes lives as time advances) simply to assert some idea that you might want to retain a democratic choice in a rapidly deteriorating unknown onslaught…. some of us might prefer to go with the person or entity that we hope might know a little more than us. And if we live through it all we can have our event post mortems to see who was corrupt and wanted power and get rich.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So you are saying you believe it is acceptable to suspend democracy, impose tyranny, and violate people’s civil rights and bodily autonomy in the event of perceived danger or threat?
LikeLike
I believe that for the survival of the country (if not humanity, depending on the threat) that very likely a singular event might just warrant we do just that. This is not a foreign concept since there are similar avenues already set up for government to respond, specifically the War Powers Act…. which, by the way, has defined start and stop mechanisms in place. I suppose you could opt for just sitting back and saying in effect, “If my neighbor has to die to preserve MY freedom of choice, so be it.” I’m not sure what you don’t understand about the concept of maybe needing a “ship’s captain” to weather a storm. You just have to be specific what will define a “storm” and to what lengths the person retains the power. Obviously because humanity is running everything that humanity will certainly inject all their foibles into any situation. Nothing is perfect.. including democracy. Our national strengths as a nation can also be our worst enemy depending on the emergency. It’s prudent to know that and build in guardrails as much as possible.
LikeLike
Something I find interesting, you seem to trust the government, your “captain” to do the right thing, but not me, not the civilian population. You accuse me and perhaps others of possibly thinking, “If my neighbor has to die to preserve MY freedom of choice, so be it.” Yet, you do not apply the same standard to your alleged captain, your government tyrant? I’m curious why you believe the civilian population can’t be trusted to do the right thing but the government can?
You are quite right about this part, ”I’m not sure what you don’t understand about the concept of maybe needing a “ship’s captain” to weather a storm.” Through life experience I have learned that storms are not nearly as scary as the self appointed tyrants who often think they know best how to manage them.
LikeLike
That I will agree with… life experience does seem to influence how we choose to perceive life. ”Walk in my shoes.” does carry importance.
LikeLike
So, now we have to define what is meant by “safe,” “effective,” and “thoroughly studied,” especially when those words are used in a medical context. We also have to define “lie.” Again, you confuse making a mistake with lying. And you don’t allow for the possibility of misunderstanding and miscommunication when different people use and hear the same words.
Do we have recordings of people sitting around, rubbing their hands together, and saying “Let’s all lie about the vaccine?” Do we have the vaccine equivalent of the Pentagon Papers? I don’t think we do. But you wish to believe the worst, and I don’t thinks it’s likely that I’m going to change that.
Did I ever say that all vaccines are good? No, I did not. Did I ever say that vaccines are risk-free? No, I did not. Please do not add words that I did not use. Everything done in medicine has risks. Everything. The question is always “Is it better to do something or do nothing?” Which will save more lives? Sometimes it’s something, and sometimes it’s nothing, and sometimes it’s damn hard to get the answer right.
Have vaccines saved millions of lives? Simple question. This is one where we might possibly agree. Have vaccines saved millions of lives? Yes or no?
O/A says no. What do you say?
LikeLike
Oh, a bit off the subject, I admit, but how many lies does Trump have to tell before he “loses you trust and has zero credibility?”
LikeLike
“With knowledge comes great sorrow” and the rude awakening definitely reveals much to be sorrowful over. Knowing too much about the evil in the world can take you from sorrowful to despondent and hopeless and really, we can’t do much about it except try not to give into being evil ourselves in response. Finding the balance between knowing what is happening around us and being overwhelmed by it, requires unplugging from the digital and bathing our minds and souls in the organic world, studying scripture and meditating on those truths to counteract the trauma inducing fear cloud that we live under now. They’re really doing a number on us and there is a lot to grieve, with many new threats on the horizon. We have to be mindful to do that which keeps us strong. Naps are important.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Amen! Well said, indeed! I honestly did understand that verse for much of my life, but I sure do now. Jesus Himself was a man of many sorrows.
LikeLiked by 2 people
And nor does correlation exclude causation, right? Funny that we so seldom hear that side …?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Right?! Does it say, causation is ALWAYS completely unrelated to correlation? Of course not, but that is exactly how it was understood.
LikeLiked by 1 person
AMEN, I.B.! I recently met a “community” ( cult?) of sweet, trusting, blissfully ignorant people. I almost envied them, wanting to take a mental “nap” myself. But as hard as it is to know the truth about certain things, it’s worth it to know the One who is the Way the Truth, and the Life. In eternity, you and I will be better off, and this brief existence will be a distant memory.
LikeLiked by 2 people
LOL! Ahh, the trusting, blissfully ignorant people! There’s a challenging moral dilemma involved there, do we just leave people to their bliss or do we try to share the misery? I honestly don’t know, that’s more of rhetorical question. With children it’s pretty easy, I have a good grasp of what is going to be age appropriate doses of reality, but with grown up people it gets much more challenging to discern. A few times the Holy Spirit has actually told me to button up, it’s not your job to enlighten everyone.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I was well aware that that was an option for me, so I was VERY hesitant to speak up. But when their guru finished the teaching and the floor was open for discussion, and all anyone else did was flatter the guy, I asked a question. Since he had insisted that we’re all God’s children, no matter the religion, I alluded to Jesus’ calling some people children of the devil and asked him to explain the distinction between a child of God and a child of the devil. He gave a vague answer about listening to the voice of God and I obeying it. (No explanation of how we know it’s God. 🤷) I commented that I thought John 3:16 sums up pretty well how o e becomes a child of God, that verse 17 expresses the heart of God, and that verse 18 is a warning, and let it go at that. He didn’t pursue it, but I pray some of the people there will take a moment to look up those verses.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, that sounds stressful!
I sometimes joke about how I often feel like I’m trapped in a really corny after school special with bad actors. Once a chaplain in a hospital turned to me and said, “all paths lead to the Father, right?” I didn’t want to make a scene so I tried to just smile and ignore it, but the second time he demanded I agree with him, I was like, “well no, not exactly.” It was awful but also kind of funny because I was looking around the room wondering if I were a contestant on Candid Camera or something. I just did not have “argue with a man of God” on my bingo card that day.
You can take all kinds of bumpy roads in life to find your way to Jesus but, “no one comes to the Father but through Me.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
I felt no compulsion to pursue it, and I think I planted some good seed, while staying friendly. – They still want to have my books in their library! 🤣
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well … but “correlation does not imply causation” was mainly a bit of advice for beginning political science graduate students, in my experience, who were prone to make sweeping generalizations about things when they got nice results out of SPSS. In that context, it was a quite valuable reminder.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Is there a word for when good intentions deliver the precise opposite result, in fact you wind up ushering in the very thing you were trying to prevent? Probably, but I can’t think of it. That’s exactly what happened with “correlation does not imply causation.” All across the culture it suddenly became, “correlation NEVER implies causation.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
Probably because it’s just so hard to think about statistics. [crossing eyes]
LikeLiked by 2 people
Is there a word for when good intentions deliver the precise opposite result…? “Kudzu”.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Oh, Kudzu! That’s a really good analogy. In Hawaii in 1883 they brought in mongoose in an attempt to control the rat population. I think they are very cute, but now they have an invasive mongoose problem. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
I was stationed aboard the USS Meyerkord at Pear Harbor in the early ’70s. The main problem with the mongoose was their affinity for bird eggs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah, the meme phrases! There was one that I saw even more often than you examples was to end a statement with “let that sink in”. Often uses in grammatically incorrect ways! 😄
As for correlation/causation, this is actually the first time I’ve seen the phrase with the word “imply” in it. I’d always heard and used the phrase as “correlation does not equal causation.” Which changes the meaning quite a bit. It is true. Correlation does not equal causation. However, to “imply” is to express, state or make evident indirectly, so correlation can absolutely imply causation. In fact, it’s about the only thing correlation can do. One then has to determine if it is implying something correctly or incorrectly.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Oh yes, I remember “let that sink in.” Memes can get so annoying, although I liked the literal translation with the sink outside the door trying to get let in. That was pretty funny.
LikeLiked by 3 people
LOL!! I saw that one, too!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am awake, but I’m going to go to bed very soon, and I’m looking forward to it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I do hope you had a good rest! Being awake 24/7 is not a good thing.🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person