An apology to Dennis

[Roger Chapman]

I don?t like apologising any more than the next man but I do accept that it needs to be done if circumstances warrant it even when the other party is as unpleasant as Dennis frequently is but I am not going to be gracious about it. This apology is for my benefit, not his.

The circumstances are that over on the DIY Data thread I branded Dennis a liar because he claimed that the error in a calculation was down to a simple typo, he had failed to press the right key for a 9.

The calculation in question was the simple average of 5C and -14C which he originally quoted as -8. I am afraid I didn?t accept that he genuinely believed that the average of 5 and -14 was actually -9 even after his original calculation had been called into question. I thought he was just generating his usual smokescreen when faced with an embarrassing situation.

However after a good nights sleep I have come to the conclusion that he was being totally honest in putting forward the typo as the error.

So there you have it. I am sorry Dennis that I doubted your probity in this particular circumstance.

But as to your monumental ineptitude in failing to average a positive and negative integer correctly and then not spotting such an obvious mistake when the calculation was called into question, that is something you will have to live with as you are never *ever* going to be able to live that down.

[george [dicegeorge]]

love, peace, mutual respect and tolerance blossom like a rare orchid, or perhaps like a plague of daffodils? [g]

Roger Chapman wrote:

[Tim Streater]

I didn't see this thread (or didn't bother with it). Presumably the answer of -4.5 appeared somewhere.

[dennis]

Not yet it hasn't. It was a bit of sarcasm that went straight over his head. ;-) Just shows that it doesn't work with some. He seriously thinks I got it wrong twice even though you only add two numbers and divide by two.

[Fredxx]

You mean 5 + 14 = 19

Dived by 2 = 9.5

Add the minus sign for good measure and round up, or should that be down for the shear hell of it?

Where am I going wrong Dennis?

[Roger Chapman]

Oh Dear, there is me apologising for calling Dennis a liar when he probably wasn't lying and he immediately switches into blatant liar mode.

The next passage is copied directly from one of the more recent posts in the DIY data thread:

**********************************************

Oh yes I can add two numbers together, divide by two and even get the right answer, unlike you. But which two? Where do I have to substitute that missing nine in order to confirm how you fouled up?

Let us see:

The average of 5 and -14 is -4.5 so the 9 doesn't fit there.

If the upper limit is 5 and the average -8 then the lower limit is -23 so that isn't the typo either.

If the lower limit is -14 and the average is -8 then the upper limit is

-2 so not that either.

Conclusion - not just a simple typo then.

This is getting tedious so how about the average of -5 and -14.

Golly gosh, what a surprise. There at last is a 9. (OK actually 9.5 but one can hardly expect such accuracy from someone who can't cope with negative numbers).

No wonder Dennis is trying to wriggle his way out of admitting to such a stupid error.

***************************************

You can huff and you can puff all you like but anyone who reads the thread in full, or even the little extract above, will eventually conclude, like me that you managed to c*ck up a simple calculation. You keep on telling me I don't get it but really the only thing I didn't get at first was your lack of mathematical ability. My comment further up that thread that you don't seem comfortable with figures must count as the understatement of the year so far.

[Tim Streater]

[snip]

You don't need mathematical ability to average two numbers, even if one of them is negative. You need arithmetical ability.

This must be part of the "let's pretend everything is easy" approach to life we've seen over the last few years, so that they pretend that they are teaching children mathematics, when it is in fact arithmetic (sums, basically).

[Archie]

The minus signs matter in arithmetic. You can't just leave them out and add them later where you like.

5+(-14) = -9

-9/2= -4.5

As for the apology to Denis.

"I'm sorry BUT" is hardly an apology. More like an excuse to continue and argument. Grimly got it spot on.

Archie

[Roger Chapman]

That really is a matter of semantics. For me arithmetic will always be a branch of maths.

Well you have to start somewhere but my take on that is diametrically opposed to yours even though I suspect that the underlying concerns may be much the same. Failing to teach the basics (how to add, subtract, multiply and divide) without the assistance of calculator or computer means the children of today are very poorly prepared to advance any further in mathematics. But never mind, they will get a C+ pass at GCSE maths and a piece of paper that might even take them as far as a degree in a non rigorous subject.

[Tim Streater]

and times tables, don't forget them.

This was basically my point, yes :-)

[dennis]

I can tell you what they have already concluded.. you didn't apologise at all, you used your "apology" as an excuse to start another thread in the hope you could score some points for your pathetic argument as you can't win it with logic, science or maths.

[Roger Chapman]

(huff+puff)^n

((-14+5)/2)=?

Is it: 1. -8, 2. -9 or 3. -4.5?

I must admit I was disappointed that Archie chose to question my ethics while ignoring your blatant lie but perhaps that is because you are already considered beyond the pale.

[Archie]

I missed the original thread but went back to read it after your "Apology". Denis's original post is shown below. I see nothing in Denis's statement to justify your rant. You are assuming that Denis meant to give the average of the two datapoints -14 and +5. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't but his statement below is correct. I don't see any blatant lie.

[geoff]

In message , Roger Chapman writes

A "hacksaw" moment

so to speak

[Matty F]

The funny part about the discussion is that for correct analysis of whether "Global Warming" is happening or not (it's not!) I have been advocating the simplest form of daily temperature measurement, i.e. reading a thermometer at 9am and writing the figure down. No calculations are required. Roger Chapman preferred to get the highest and lowest temperature for the day and average them. And nobody in that thread was able to get the average correct! As well as that, maximum/minimum thermometers require resetting after each reading. In the 50 to 130 years old equipment that I was talking about, that requires manual handling of a thermometer which is bound to introduce errors, even to the extent of damaging the thermometer so that it needs to be replaced.

It's far simpler and more accurate to read a thermometer without touching it. Note that we are not talking about modern automated equipment.

[geoff]

That would just be a half arsed apology ...

[Clot]

:)

[Roger Chapman]

In the context of that thread and his repeated assertions that averaging the maximum and minimum temperatures doesn't give an average for the day you should have looked a little deeper. Dennis himself admitted to a typo so even he accepted he had made a mistake. What he won't admit to is that despite all his protestations to the contrary he didn't manage to get the average of -14 and 5 correct. However that wasn't the blatant lie which occurred in this thread and not the previous one. The blatant lie was his response to Tim's question repeated below:

********************** [Tim] > I didn't see this thread (or didn't bother with it). Presumably the > answer of -4.5 appeared somewhere. [Dennis] Not yet it hasn't. ********************** When of course it had.

[Roger Chapman]

snip

News to me.

Dubious conclusion.

The only thing that can be said with any certainty about a temperature measured at 9am apart from the time is that it will not be higher than the maximum temperature of that day nor lower than the minimum. The reason I think the max/min average is better is because it aproximates to the true mean.

[Tim Streater]

[snip]

I don't see why it should. The proper average is going to be obtained by continuous measurements and getting the area under the curve. In practice one might take an (automated) measurement every few minutes. Two data points don't tell you much.