fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2708 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2708 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Degrassi Junior High/Degrassi High and Saved By The Bell]

__________________________________________________

03.

[The Cinema Snob]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Silicon Valley]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Xavier Dolan]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Pacific Rim]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Sailor Moon]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Iwan Rheon]

__________________________________________________

10.

[Love Stage!!]

__________________________________________________

11.

[The Losers (movie)]

__________________________________________________

12.

[K-pop]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 052 secrets from Secret Submission Post #387.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I was certain this was originally sourced to The Onion, but no, it looks like this is actually a serious study. I don't even know how to respond to this.

Edit: Reposting a comment someone else made on the linked page. "So I downloaded their spreadsheet and I'm having trouble figuring out how they drew this conclusion. It is true that female hurricanes killed more people on average. But that's including pre-1979 data, when all hurricanes were female named and were deadlier because we didn't have early warning systems. If you look at the post-1979 data, you will find that male- and female-named hurricanes are almost equally deadly, about 16 per event. Maybe they did something more sophisticated incorporating hurricane strength but this looks like a bias. And not a gender one."

Edited 2014-06-03 02:03 (UTC)

Apparently the effect in question was reported at a level of p=0.073, which might as well be no effect.

I wonder how far this has spread by now. Which do you think it'll get: a Jezebel article saying it's real, an IO9 article saying it's bunk, or both at once?

Edit: Oh my God, it's on Jezebel already!

Edit to the edit: And what do you know, the headline claims the study's real, while the article links to an extensive debunking. http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/06/02/why-have-female-hurricanes-killed-more-people-than-male-ones/

Edited 2014-06-03 02:34 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that when I copied the link.

I think we'll get both since it's great click-bait.

[ SECRET POST #2708 ]

Re: Female-named hurricanes kill more than male ones because people don’t respect them, study find

Re: Female-named hurricanes kill more than male ones because people don’t respect them, study find

Re: Female-named hurricanes kill more than male ones because people don’t respect them, study find

Re: Female-named hurricanes kill more than male ones because people don’t respect them, study find