People are fond of the notion that “you can prove anything with statistics.” That’s not true, but it often takes deep understanding to find errors in statistical reasoning. Even simple problems can be difficult to solve correctly, and when it comes to complex problems the opportunities for error multiply. The simple problem I have in mind is called “The Monty Hall Problem” and the complex problem is unraveling the errors in the derivation of the global warming Hockey Stick. The first is discussed in The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules our Lives, a superb introduction to statistical theory by physicist Leonard Mlodinow. The second is the subject of The Hockey Stick Illusion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science, a careful exposition by A.W. Montford of the errors made by climate scientists. Together they explain a great deal of what is bogus in modern science.

If the values of two observations tend to rise and fall together over time, the observations are correlated. For example, the rise of violent crime in American society in the 1960’s and 1970’s matched the rise in violence on television. That lead to speculation that violence on television caused the increase. It is fair for correlation to raise such suspicions, but the correlation falls short of proof. Measures of violence on television continued to rise in recent decades, but crime rates have fallen. Young people commit more crimes, and the baby boomer population surge reaching maturity was the more likely cause of the the rise and fall.