There is so much context missing here it is crazy.
This is such a shameless use of manipulative statistics, it would only convince the dumbest of people of its argument.
I can’t tell if your question is a poorly veiled critique of my comment, or if you genuinely don’t see the presentation of data in the post. The image literally has a grouping of data points conveying a narrative; that’s statistics. A collection of quantitative data. Just because its bad statistics doesn’t mean it isn’t.
There is so much context missing here it is crazy. This is such a shameless use of manipulative statistics, it would only convince the dumbest of people of its argument.
What do you think a ‘statistic’ is?
I can’t tell if your question is a poorly veiled critique of my comment, or if you genuinely don’t see the presentation of data in the post. The image literally has a grouping of data points conveying a narrative; that’s statistics. A collection of quantitative data. Just because its bad statistics doesn’t mean it isn’t.