Hierarquia de Modelos (Econômicos, Científicos etc). Do melhor (Causal) ao pior (Estatístico).

William Briggs, brilahnte estatístico, crítico ferrenho da disciplina estatística está lançando o livro acima. Recomendo totalmente.

No blog dele, Briggs traz um pouco do livro. Hoje ele trouxe a hierarquia de models. Começa do modelo causal (o melhor) até o estatístico (o pior e mais usado).

Vale muito a pena a leitura em tempos em quem mjita gente confia em modelos econômicos puramente baseados em probabilidades sem qualquer fundamento.

Vejamos o que Briggs escreveu no excelente blog dele.

The Hierarchy Of Models: From Causal (Best) To Statistical (Worst)

There is a hierarchy of models in the sense they offer insight into the thing modeled. The order of importance is: causal, deterministic, probabilistic, statistical. Most models use mixtures of these elements.

All models have this form: a set of premises, which include any number of facts, truths, supposeds, data, and such forth, and a proposition of interest, which is the thing being modeled conditional on those premises.

A classic—or perhaps better, as you’ll agree, classical—causal model “Socrates is mortal” given “All men are mortal and Socrates is a man.” The model predicts Socrates will die because of the nature of all men. It is man’s nature to die, and Socrates (and you, dear reader) are among the race of men. We knowall men are mortal from the necessarily limited sample of observations of past men, and from the induction of these dead men to the entire race.

Causal models give insight into or make use of the nature, the universal essence, of the thing of interest. Causal models require universals; they also require induction because we know the validity of all universals, natures, essences, through a type of induction.

Deterministic models are common in mathematics and are usually stated in a form such that the proposition of interest is a function of premises, like this: y = f(x). The “x” is placeholder for any number of premises. An example of a functional form of a deterministic model is y = a + bx³, which shows there are three explicit premises, the “a”, “b”, and x³, and one implicit, which is the form or arrangement of these premises. This equation might give the numerical level of some thing as a function of a, b, and x. It says, “Given a, b, and x, y will certainly be at a + bx³.” The equation determines y, but doesn’t explain the essence of the cause.

Some causal models may be put in equation form, but not all deterministic models are also causal. The equation given applies to a black box with two readouts, a “y” and “x”, and a dial is discovered to change the “x”. The formula is induced based on rotating the dial and noting the values of y and x. Only in the weakest sense can we say we have discovered the essence of the machine: we don’t even know what the values imply. Interestingly (and obviously to mathematical readers), more than one equation can be found to fit the same data (premises), which is also proof we have not learned the nature of the machine.

Probabilistic models abound. Given “This is a two-state object and only one state of s₁ or s₂ may show at any time”, the probability “The object is in state s₁” is 1/2. Note carefully that no such real object need exist; and neither must real objects exist for causal or deterministic models, as should be obvious.

There isn’t any understanding of essence or nature of this object in this probability model: we don’t know the workings. If we did, we’d have a deterministic or causal model. The probability is thus only a measure of our state of knowledge of the truth of the proposition and not of the essence of object. Probability models are silent on cause.

The last and least are statistical models. These are always ad hoc and conflate probability and decision or mistake probability with essence. Statistical models are a prominent cause of the vast amount of over-certainty which plagues science.

Statistical models purport to say that x causes y, or that x is “linked to” y, through the mechanism of hypothesis testing, via frequentist p-values or Bayesian Bayes factors, but though x may really be a cause of y, or x really may be linked to y in some essential way, the statistical judgment that these conditions are so is always a fallacy.

Hypothesis testing conflates decision with probability; nothing in any hypothesis test gives the desired probability “Given x, what is the probability of y”; instead, testing says, based on ad hoc criteria, x and y are mysteriously related (“linked”) or that x causes y. These inferences are never valid. The importance of this logical truth cannot be overstated. This why so many statistical models report false results. (A reminder that a logical argument can be invalid but still have a true conclusion; the conclusion is just true for other reasons than the stated argument.)

Lastly, statistical models purport to report “effect size”, which is a measure of the importance of x on y. This “effect size” always either false or an assertion given far too much confidence (I used this word in its plain-English sense). Effect sizes say something about a premise inside x (a parameter or parameters) and not x itself, hence they are always over-certain. This form of over-certainty is eliminated by moving to a probability model.

As Fotos dos Partido de Obama e Hillary Dizem Tudo. Políticos Sem Pátria e Sem Religião

As fotos da Convenção do Partido Democrata, do presidente Obama e da candidata Hillary Clinton, dizem tudo.

Por exemplo, não é visto nenhuma bandeira dos Estados Unidos no palanque, nem entre os partidários, mas há bandeira da antiga URSS e da Palestina:

- Bandeira da antiga URSS

 

- Bandeira da Palestina dentro da convenção.

- Radicais que odeiam até seus candidatos e querem o fim da polícia

- Palco da convenção Democrata não tem nenhuma bandeira americana

- Em contraste com palco da convenção do Partido Republicano

- Notícias dão conta que o Partido Democrata sentiu a crítica de não ter nenhuma bandeira americana e começou a providenciar

- Partido sem religião ou aceitando qualquer religião que não seja o cristianismo. Em 61 discursos proferidos até agora na convenção do Partido Democrata nenhum mencionou o Estado Islâmico, o terrorismo, terror ou Islã.

- Partido Democrata sempre fala que deve-se construir pontes e não muros, deve-se aceitar todos. Mas a convenção deles foi murada e também o palco foi murado para evitar os próprios paertidários.

E tem gente pulando as cercas.

3 Vídeos: Plágios de Obama em Discursos.

No dia em que mostram o plágio da esposa de Donald Trump copiando um discurso de Michelle Obama, é bom que fiquem todos silenciosos pois o plágio é uma praga na política e na ciência. Vejam os três vídeos abaixo.

Crime e Raça nos Estados Unidos. "Não é Culpa dos Brancos"

O texto abaixo deveria ser levado em conta por todos que discutem o racismo nos Estados Unidos.

O artigo se chama Not White Problem (Não é Problema dos Brancos), porque mostra que a taxa de criminalidade nos Estados Unidos é muito baixa em termos históricos ( como mostra gráfico acima), mas os crimes estão concentrados em bairros negros. 90% dos crimes são cometidos por negros ou latinos!!!!

A imensa maioria dos crimes é negro matando negro!!!!

E que em geral as cidades que têm mais crimes são aquelas governadas por esquerdistas. Essas cidades têm leis rigorosas contra armas, mas não adiantam nada.


Vejam abaixo:

The statistics in the chart below are representative of every Democrat controlled urban shithole city in America. Obama and his anti-gun activist minions are peddling a false narrative about guns because they understand most Americans are dumber than a sack of hammers and easily manipulated by propaganda. Obama uses every high profile shooting to blame guns, in order to deflect people from seeing the truth. And the truth is guns are not a problem in white America.

It’s only a problem in the urban ghettos with the toughest gun laws run by Democrat mayors and city councils. Chicago is a perfect example of Obama ignoring the real problem. Fifty years of welfare programs and treating black people like victims has created a dysfunctional system leading to hopelessness, crime, and perpetual poverty. Chicago is 32% white, but they commit only 3.5% of the murders. Over 96% of the murders are committed by non-whites. Essentially, it is young black men murdering other black men. White people are not in the equation and are not part of the problem. It’s a black problem framed as a gun problem by Obama and his lying apparatchiks.

There are approximately 8,000 gun related homicides annually in the U.S. The vast majority occur in the urban ghettos and are committed by blacks and hispanics against other blacks and hispanics. They use illegally acquired guns, so more gun laws will do nothing. Their lawless culture, requiring no personal responsibility by those who father children, creates the dysfunction and crime. The urban ghetto kill zones all have the same thing in common – run by liberal Democrats for decades, with poverty created by their welfare policies, dreadful public schools, and a black population who don’t work and take no personal responsibility for their lives or their children.

Here are the murders by city for a sampling of these shitholes:

• Los Angeles – 587
• Chicago – 508
• NYC – 333
• Detroit – 316
• Phila – 248
• Baltimore – 233
• New Orleans – 150
• Indianapolis – 129
• Memphis – 124
• St. Louis – 120
• Newark -112
• Milwaukee – 104
• Washington DC – 103

There are dozens of other shitholes like Camden, Kansas City, Atlanta, Oakland, Pittsburgh, and Miami with extremely high murder rates, and in every case more than 90% are committed by non-whites. Why don’t you hear Obama giving speeches about black communities policing themselves and taking responsibility for the crime, drugs and murder in their neighborhoods? He has no problem with proclamations about white people clinging to their guns in middle America where there are virtually no murders.

The entire gun narrative peddled by liberals is false. The crime rate has been falling for 25 years. There were 24,703 murders in 1991 when the population was 253 million. Murders in 2014 totaled 14,249 with a population of 317 million. The willfully ignorant American public completely buys the falsehoods presented by Obama and believes murders and crime are skyrocketing.

Today, the national crime rate is about half of what it was at its height in 1991. Violent crime has fallen by 51 percent since 1991, and property crime by 43 percent. In 2013 the violent crime rate was the lowest since 1970. And this holds true for unreported crimes as well. According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, since 1993 the rate of violent crime has declined from 79.8 to 23.2 victimizations per 1,000 people.

So, with homicides at a 25 year low and completely confined to the urban ghettos where young black men kill other young black men, we need new gun laws to restrict what white people can own? It makes you wonder. Why has the government militarized local police forces across the country in white communities when crime and murder is virtually non-existent in those communities? Why is Obama and his liberal nazi hordes trying to ban any gun capable of providing defense against a tyrannical government? Why has this become a war on whites when it is solely a black problem? It’s almost as if the government is treating working class whites with guns as the enemy. I wonder.

Fotos de André Zucca: A França sob o Jugo Nazista. Impressionantes e Tristes.

A França foi dominada em duas semanas pelos nazistas. Hitler entrou em Paris e mostrou quem mandava. Depois as tropas ocuparam a França mantendo um regime francês (chamado de Vichy, pela cidade sede) que apenas era um governo fantoche, seguia as ordens nazistas. O Regime Vichy inclusive mandou vários judeus franceses aos campos de concentração, enquanto outros países dominados, como a Dinamarca, protegeu seus judeus.

Como o povo francês se comportou sob o jugo nazista?

Esse período de história da França é seguramente o período mais hediondo do povo francês. Eles têm vergonha desse período, apenas uma pequena parte do povo formou a resistência francesa.

O fotógrafo André Zucca (foto acima) mostrou, para a tristeza da França, que o povo francês seguiu a vida normal, mesmo dominada pelo mal. Quando essas fotos estiveram em exposição em 2008, muitos pediram para fechar a exposição, pela dor que as fotos traziam aos franceses. Além de serem historicamente importantes, as fotos de Zucca estão em cores. Quando a França foi liberada em 1944, Zucca foi preso mas depois solto e nunca condenado a nada.

Zucca trabalhava em um jornal que era dominado pelos nazistas, e assim tinha o incentivo de mostrar que a França seguia a vida normal sob o jugo nazista. Mas vendo as fotos não se pode deixar de notar que Zucca não teve nenhum dificuldade de mostrar isso.

Os franceses conviveram tranquilamente com o nazismo.

Vejamos abaixo o dia a dia de Paris sob o domínio nazista, em algumas excepcionais fotos de André Zucca que agora fazem parte do acervo da Bibliothèque Historique de la Ville de Paris, desde 1986. As fotos foram divulgadas pelo jornal Daily Mail, lá vocês podem ver várias outras fotos.

1) Homem judeu caminha nas ruas usando a estrela amarela que era obrigado a usar como judeu.

2) Cinema para soldados alemães em Paris.

3) Visitantes na placa que celebra os soldados mortos na Primeira Guerra.

 4) Povo se diverte no Rio Sena na Paris ocupada pelos nazistas.

5) Povo nas tuas seguindo vida normal na Paris ocupada.

6) Nazistas mudam as placas de rua para o alemão.

7) Soldados nazistas tocam nas ruas de Paris.

8) Mulher judia usando a estrela amarela de identificação dos judeus.

9) Crianças de divertem próximo da Torre Eiffel.

10) Nazistas desfilam por Paris.

 11) Homem caminha com os filhos nas ruas de Paris ocupada.

11) Bandeiras nazistas em Paris.

12) Homem em idade para servir o exército nas ruas de Paris.

13) Nazista caminha entre a população parisiense.

14) Placa nazista convoca os franceses a se juntar aos nazistas na luta contra os bolchevistas (comunistas).

15) Nazistas caminham nos cafés parisienses lotados.

Livre Comércio e a Doutrina da Igreja

Stephen Krasson escreveu um ótimo artigo sobre o que a Doutrina Católica pensa do "livre comércio" no site da Crisis Magazine. Em suma, a Igreja pensa que o "livre comércio" nunca é tão livre, por isso a ideia de livre comércio não pode dominar as relações internacionais.

Vejamos parte do texto:

Free Trade and Catholic Social Teaching

STEPHEN M. KRASON

...

Of the social encyclicals, probably Blessed Pope Paul VI’s Populorum Progressioaddressed it the most. He emphasized that the rule of free trade cannot govern international relations. To be sure, he could see its advantages. If economic power were equal, it would be “an incentive to progress and a reward for effort” (#58). It’s the same as competition and the market domestically: while competition is valuable it must “be kept within limits which make it just and moral, and therefore human” (#61). Prices supposedly set freely by the market—and he puts “freely” in quotes to underscore that market forces frequently don’t work in practice the way economic theory says—“can produce unfair results” (#58). These unfair results can have sad human consequences. As with the domestic economy, just because the parties have agreed to something, it doesn’t mean that it will be just. Pope Paul here was thinking of such things as unequal bargaining power and general conditions of sharp economic or wealth disparity among nations. This conjures up the notion of “liberty of contract” on the individual level. This governed American economic thinking and resulting constitutional jurisprudence in the period, roughly, from 1870 to 1937, and stymied many attempts to enact needed labor legislation. Somehow it was believed that the worker who had to accept a subsistence-level wage and pathetic working conditions—with no chance of employment otherwise—was acting “freely” in agreeing to an implicit contract an employer offered him. The law couldn’t “interfere” with his “choice,” despite the fact that the worker had no bargaining power at all. In other words, Pope Paul and all of the Church’s social teaching was saying that morality in economic matters, as in other realms of life, must not be fashioned by man—what is just and moral is not a mere human concoction. He also said that the consequence both domestically and internationally of making competition the sole ordering principle is that it “too often creates an economic dictatorship” (#59).

In the early twentieth century the economist Fr. Heinrich Pesch, S.J. developed solidarism or the solidaristic system of human work, a blueprint for an economic system built squarely on Catholic principles and the natural law. His writing influenced the shaping of the Church’s social teaching and it has been said that Pope Pius XI’s great encyclical, Quadragesimo Anno, promulgated five years after Pesch’s death, distinctly bore its imprint. Decades later, Pesch’s thought appeared to have influenced the Solidarity trade union movement in Poland that laid the groundwork for the collapse of eastern European communism. Pesch rejected a regimen of completely free trade, for the same reason that is echoed in Populorum Progressio: the problem of commutative justice—that some countries would not gain the same advantage from it as others. Indeed, some would be positively hurt, as when cheap foreign products flooded their markets and overwhelmed their domestic producers. This is part of the current problem in the U.S.: it’s more beneficial for companies’ bottom lines to import goods—and, increasingly, use services—produced by cheap labor overseas than to keep Americans employed.

So, Pesch asserts, there is no problem with some amount of protectionism. As he put it in his main work, the mammoth Lehrbuch der Nationalökonomie, the notion of an “international market” should be promoted, “but always in such a way that the national market will remain a strong first line of defense.” So nations rightly must take care of their own economic needs first. He also said that the trading policies of a nation have to be altered “as the requirements of the national welfare change, and as circumstances internally and externally vary.” He added that while no nation can go its own way, its “national autonomy,” rightly understood, must be preserved and it must be careful not “to sacrifice certain economic sectors” if that would go against its “best interests.” It hardly has to be stated that those interests would include something as basic as a nation’s need to keep its people employed. As Pesch bluntly says, “the national economy may not be sacrificed to the world economy in the name of free trade.”

By the way, if anyone thinks that in her concern about international charity and solidarity the Church insists that better-off nations have to ignore the needs of their own people in the interest of being international benefactors—more generally, that national interest has no place—he should note that Populorum Progressio (#48-49) says that they are obliged to contribute their “superfluous wealth” and “some of their production” (italics added) to poorer nations. We don’t have an obligation to suffer so Third World economies can develop. The meaning of all this for the U.S. is that there is nothing from the standpoint of Catholic social teaching that should make it feel embarrassed or reluctant to alter her current free-trade regimen to protect American jobs if that is what’s necessary to help the economic situation of the country. In light of what Pope Pius XII said about treaties in the usually forgotten encyclical Summa Pontificatus (#77), this should not be done unilaterally, but the U.S.—for the sake of keeping intact what he called the “mutual trust” among nations—should renegotiate provisions of agreements if they are the cause of certain of her current economic problems.

We have mentioned bodies like the Would Trade Organization. Some think it is part of the reason for U.S. trade problems, and additionally some are critical because having to follow its decrees compromises national sovereignty. Also, like most international organizations, it features all the usual discontents of bureaucracy. Recent popes have called for a reform of international economic institutions and of international organizations generally. While they have urged more international arrangements to deal with truly international problems, they have always called for respect for the principle of subsidiarity. In his social encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict XVI said that subsidiarity was crucial for globalization—even in its economic dimension—not just to preserve freedom and avoid tyranny, but also for the sake of producing “effective results” (#57).

O Caso Hillary Clinton.Justiça é Só Para os Pobres. Ricos Escapam

Apesar do FBI dizer ontem que Hillary Clinton cometeu diversos ato criminosos que envolvem assuntos confidenciais, o FBI disse que não irá processá-la. Isso está gerando um enorme repercussão. A imensa maioria do povo americano vê isso como o caso de proteção política. Já ocorreram casos bem mais simples e o FBI processou pelo mesmo motivo.

A imprensa americana em geral diz por lá que a justiça americana virou justiça de países de banana, só pega ladrão de galinha. Até boa parte dos democratas do partido de Hillary querem que ela seja indiciada e falam que a decisão do FBI foi injusta.

Uma reportagem da Associated Press mostrou todas as mentiras de Hillary sobre o caso. Ela mente na cara dura, ao estilo de Lula.

Vejamos parte do que diz a reportagem:

AP FACT CHECK: Clinton email claims collapse under FBI probe

By STEPHEN BRAUN and JACK GILLUM

Jul. 5, 2016 4:46 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) — Key assertions by Hillary Clinton in defense of her email practices have collapsed under FBI scrutiny.

The agency's yearlong investigation found that she did not, as she claimed, turn over all her work-related messages for release. It found that her private email server did carry classified emails, also contrary to her past statements. And it made clear that Clinton used many devices to send and receive email despite her statements that she set up her email system so that she only needed to carry one.

FBI Director James Comey's announcement Tuesday that he will not refer criminal charges to the Justice Department against Clinton spared her from prosecution and a devastating political predicament. But it left much of her account in tatters and may have aggravated questions of trust swirling around her Democratic presidential candidacy.

A look at Clinton's claims since questions about her email practices as secretary of state surfaced and how they compare with facts established in the FBI probe:

CLINTON: "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material." News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: Actually, the FBI identified at least 113 emails that passed through Clinton's server and contained materials that were classified at the time they were sent, including some that were Top Secret and referred to a highly classified special access program, Comey said.

Most of those emails — 110 of them — were included among 30,000 emails that Clinton returned to the State Department around the time her use of a private email server was discovered. The three others were recovered from a forensic analysis of Clinton's server. "Any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton's position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation," Comey said. Clinton and her aides "were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information," he said.

___

CLINTON: "I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified." NBC interview, July 2016.

THE FACTS: Clinton has separately clung to her rationale that there were no classification markings on her emails that would have warned her and others not to transmit the sensitive material. But the private system did, in fact, handle emails that bore markings indicating they contained classified information, Comey said.

He said the marked emails were "a very small number." But that's not the only standard for judging how officials handle sensitive material, he added. "Even if information is not marked classified in an email, participants who know, or should know, that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

___

CLINTON: "I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work related" to the State Department. News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: Not so, the FBI found.

Comey said that when his forensic team examined Clinton's server it found there were "several thousand work-related emails that were not in the group of 30,000" that had been returned by Clinton to the State Department.

...

CLINTON: "It was on property guarded by the Secret Service, and there were no security breaches. ... The use of that server, which started with my husband, certainly proved to be effective and secure." News conference, March 2015.

CLINTON campaign website: "There is no evidence there was ever a breach."

THE FACTS: The campaign website claimed "no evidence" of a breach, a less categorical statement than Clinton herself made last year, when she said there was no breach. The FBI did not uncover a breach but made clear that that possibility cannot be ruled out.

"We assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account," Comey said.

He said evidence would be hard to find because hackers are sophisticated and can cover their tracks. Comey said his investigators learned that Clinton's security lapses included using "her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries." Comey also noted that hackers breached the email accounts of several outsiders who messaged with Clinton.

Comey did not mention names, but a Romanian hacker who called himself Guccifer accessed and later leaked emails from Sidney Blumenthal, an outside adviser to Clinton who regularly communicated with her.

Associated Press writer Calvin Woodward contributed to this report.

EDITOR'S NOTE _ A look at the veracity of claims by public officials.