"By the way how is your preferred Swedish response to Coronoavirus going? Last time I looked it was about 310 dead and climbing exponentially. Australia 2.5 times the population and about 25 dead. Your a numbers guy so how does it look to you?"You don't need to be much of a "numbers guy" to understand what's going on; you simply need to not be an absolute bell-end.
It looks to anyone who either possesses more than zero working knowledge of numbers, or who is not a churlish moron like any sample of two data points: statistically arbitrary and meaningless.
For example, let's extend the data array to more than just 2 entries:
View attachment 2084641See what happened there?
Sweden looked high when being compared just to Australia, but against other European countries... actually very low. And Australia is really really low compared to the other data points.
The problem - which is where your stunted mental capacity keeps falling short - is that you are comparing one data point with another data point when one of them (Australia) is a statistical outlier.
Here is a graphical representation of Australia's death rate compared to the other countries that make up 97% (so statistically representative) of the total number of recorded of global deaths, to date (y-axis constrained for purposes of clarity):
View attachment 2084650So, just about
any country which is compared to Australia will look unfavourable on this particular measure.
End of Lesson One of:
VERYBasic Numerical Analysis - How to Prevent Looking Like Dill On The Internet When Comparing Numbers
(Copyright: School For The Frontally-Lobotomised)
[This is the second time this has been explained to you; if you again forget what it means when you compare another the death rate of two countries, simply read this post.]
