A common misconception in statistics is confusing correlation with causation. If two events are correlated, it merely means that they share the same behaviour over time, but it doesn't imply in any way that those event are related by a common cause, or even worse, that one implies the other.
You can find several (even humorous) counter examples online. For example, if you plot the number of reported pirates assault against the global temperature in the last years, you'll se that temperature is rising (unfortunately...) while pirates are almost disappearing.
One could observe this strong negative correlation and claim that hotter climate has solved the pirate issue. Of course this is a joke, but it explains why you shouldn't confuse correlation with causation.
Answer:
34 i think so i f it is wromg tell me
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
you have to do it yourself
The probability of the uppermost faces is 34
Answer:
The equations should have been added up to equal 180 instead of being set to equal each other. The two are supplementary angles, which can be seen due the rule that a pair of interior angles on the same side of the transversal is supplementary. To fix this issue from the work that they did, they should subtract the 140 from 180, so the correct measure of DKH is actually 40 degrees.
Step-by-step explanation:
