SailNet Community banner

181 - 200 of 212 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
223 Posts
Well this is from Mike's linked article by Jimmy Cornell, if you can believe that guy ;-)


"The largest contingent was from USA (143), followed by France (90), UK (66), Australia (43), New Zealand (39), Germany (6), Canada (23), Netherlands (22), Switzerland (15), Belgium (12), Norway (6), Italy (5), and a host if other nations."
So I was wondering what this is in percentage of population, but the number is so low I went with "ppm" :D
sorry for poor formatting paste
USA 0.45
France 1.34
UK 1.00
Australia 1.75
New Zealand 8.13
Germany 0.07
Canada 0.62
Netherlands 1.29
Belgium 1.06

So per population the USA is somewhat underrepresented. Though of course this is the pacific, so Oceania is more likely to show up. Obviously much easier to sail from east cost US to Caribbean.. But I agree France and Nederlands really does seem over-represented, especially considering how far from home they are!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
So I was wondering what this is in percentage of population, but the number is so low I went with "ppm" :D
sorry for poor formatting paste
USA 0.45
France 1.34
UK 1.00
Australia 1.75
New Zealand 8.13
Germany 0.07
Canada 0.62
Netherlands 1.29
Belgium 1.06

So per population the USA is somewhat underrepresented. Though of course this is the pacific, so Oceania is more likely to show up. Obviously much easier to sail from east cost US to Caribbean.. But I agree France and Nederlands really does seem over-represented, especially considering how far from home they are!
By the per capita measure, the U.S. is under-represented in the Olympics, and over-represented in the Olympic winners.

The most important part of statistics is interpreting them. Statistics is often more art than science, and anyone with an agenda can pull out some statistic and saying that it proves something or another.

Which is why we need to be a little wary of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
So, what do ascribe Cornell’s conclusion to? He didn’t just make it up — at least I don’t believe he did. I quoted what he concluded, and his data is a bit more than just individual anecdote.

… I guess that’s my pet peeve. People see a bit of research that doesn’t agree with their personal observation, so they dismiss it. Individual anecdotal information is not useless, but it’s pretty much the worst kind of data.
The data he presents on circumnavigations may be the best we have, as far as documenting who is out there.

However, I think the conclusions that he presents are opinion, not fact, and he'd be the first to tell you that. He didn't survey everyone who wasn't doing a world cruise in order to determine why they weren't going.

My pet peeve is when people take a survey or poll and call that "fact". Surveys are not fact. And their conclusions are often flavored by their presentation. Data, if properly collected, is objective. The interpretation of it is not.
 

·
Old soul
Joined
·
4,553 Posts
The data he presents on circumnavigations may be the best we have, as far as documenting who is out there.

However, I think the conclusions that he presents are opinion, not fact, and he'd be the first to tell you that. He didn't survey everyone who wasn't doing a world cruise in order to determine why they weren't going.

My pet peeve is when people take a survey or poll and call that "fact". Surveys are not fact. And their conclusions are often flavored by their presentation. Data, if properly collected, is objective. The interpretation of it is not.
That’s not what he says in the document. I quote what he wrote. Try reading it again.

If you have special access to Cornell’s thinking, please enlighten us. Otherwise, you’re just presenting your opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
That’s not what he says in the document. I quote what he wrote. Try reading it again.

If you have special access to Cornell’s thinking, please enlighten us. Otherwise, you’re just presenting your opinion.
The problem isn't in presenting opinions. It's presenting them as facts. The data is the data. His conclusions are opinions. Your interpretation, also opinion. So if someone else weighs in, you can't discount those opinions, and claim yours is fact.

This happens an awful lot, even in what we claim is news these days. It takes a discerning eye to weed the facts from the opinions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,155 Posts
When doing research and by training was forced to deal with statistics. In that setting you were obligated to pick your statistics before doing your study be it epidemiology or a trial. This eliminates several sources of bias. However, in both settings there are statistics that give a firm measure of how likely the statistic presented represents reality. A survey regardless of size (N) is open to selection bias and ascertainment bias. (I find it easier to find ocean cruisers who speak my language. I count people who fill out my questionnaire and have documentation that they went across a ocean). I think Cornell is fluent in French and English. Be interested to know how he does in Portuguese, Russian and Germanic languages. Be interested in the details of his methodology. But as Mark says it’s a small community so that would support his numbers are probably not too far off. The downside to a small N is even missing a few individuals throws your numbers way off.
My interpretation is that presented numbers do support the OPs premise.
 

·
Old soul
Joined
·
4,553 Posts
The problem isn't in presenting opinions. It's presenting them as facts. The data is the data. His conclusions are opinions. Your interpretation, also opinion. So if someone else weighs in, you can't discount those opinions, and claim yours is fact.

This happens an awful lot, even in what we claim is news these days. It takes a discerning eye to weed the facts from the opinions.

Your statements are pure opinion, with zero facts behind them. Cornell based his conclusion on the facts as he found. All I've done is report his conclusions, and pointed out that his dataset is more extensive than individual anecdote.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Your statements are pure opinion, with zero facts behind them. Cornell based his conclusion on the facts as he found. All I've done is report his conclusions, and pointed out that his dataset is more extensive than individual anecdote.
You said his conclusions were fact. I pointed out that they're his opinion.

He's entitled to it, as you are entitled to your opinion. But you can't claim either of those as fact.
 

·
Old soul
Joined
·
4,553 Posts
You said his conclusions were fact. I pointed out that they're his opinion.

He's entitled to it, as you are entitled to your opinion. But you can't claim either of those as fact.
No… I did not. Quote to me where I said his conclusions were “fact.” I don’t care what you think or opine, but I do insist you quote me accurately.

What I actually said (once again) is that these are Cornell’s conclusions based on his research and data collection. I stated his dataset is far more extensive than simple individual anecdote. And I said this is the most extensive dataset I was aware of touching on the topic at hand (an observation you supported).

You don’t appear to understand the difference between reaching a conclusion based on data and research vs a simple opinion. Your statement is that his conclusions are simple opinions, but this is based on nothing as far as you’ve presented; hence, your statement is pure opinion.

You can disagree with his conclusion, but you can’t simply call them an opinion. If you do disagree, then present your own data, or reanalyze his.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,101 Posts
My opinion is that this thread is a waste of time and that based on extensive data collected.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,155 Posts
SN is waste of time but a really FUN waste of time.

Above is tongue in cheek. In actuality have learn a lot here including this thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,101 Posts
This discussion needs to be supported by data and analysis of data. The variables are numerous and the members are essentially providing anecdotal impressions. And the barriers vary as well.
 

·
Old soul
Joined
·
4,553 Posts
This discussion needs to be supported by data and analysis of data. The variables are numerous and the members are essentially providing anecdotal impressions. And the barriers vary as well.
I agree. That’s why I dug up Cornell’s research and report. It at least attempts to draw conclusions based on actual data and research.

My own analysis of the data presented so far is that the numbers of cruisers are so small as to essentially be statistically insignificant. The numbers indicate to me that we are talking about data outliers, so it’s problematic to draw any clear causal conclusions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
No… I did not. Quote to me where I said his conclusions were “fact.” I don’t care what you think or opine, but I do insist you quote me accurately.

What I actually said (once again) is that these are Cornell’s conclusions based on his research and data collection. I stated his dataset is far more extensive than simple individual anecdote. And I said this is the most extensive dataset I was aware of touching on the topic at hand (an observation you supported).

You don’t appear to understand the difference between reaching a conclusion based on data and research vs a simple opinion. Your statement is that his conclusions are simple opinions, but this is based on nothing as far as you’ve presented; hence, your statement is pure opinion.

You can disagree with his conclusion, but you can’t simply call them an opinion. If you do disagree, then present your own data, or reanalyze his.
I'm saying that this thread is about nothing but opinion. It was started by a guy who made a rather flawed anecdotal observation. You managed to bring in some actual collected data, that even you admit is close to anecdotal.

But then you said this, about someone else's opinion presented here (not mine, by the way).:

… I guess that’s my pet peeve. People see a bit of research that doesn’t agree with their personal observation, so they dismiss it. Individual anecdotal information is not useless, but it’s pretty much the worst kind of data.

My point was that one can't be so dismissive of one opinion here, just because it doesn't align as well with a particular world view.

Cornell noted a trend of fewer long-distance voyagers. I'd be willing to believe that. He said he thought it was about personal safety. I'd be willing to believe that, too. But it's far from proven. Ten years from now we could see an uptick in world cruisers. Maybe the decline was economically driven. It probably takes a few years for a massive housing bubble to affect cruisers. Or maybe the number of cruisers in 2010 was the result of the good economic times before that. Maybe 9/11 shook us, and we're afraid to come out from under the covers.

Or maybe the current generation is more about safety, convenience, and being connected. Maybe they just don't want to leave behind their Netflix and Amazon Prime. Maybe the people in their prime cruising years (years when they could actually afford it) aren't feeling so rich right now. Casting off the lines was ALWAYS about risk. The advent of the GPS made cruising so much more accessible, but maybe after stories like Rebel Heart people figured out that there was some risk in crossing oceans after all. The funny thing about modern media is that people personalize those anecdotal stories. One shark bite or "flesh eating bacteria" can change other people's vacation plans.

We are just talking about opinions here. Sailors around a water cooler. ALL of the data here is anecdotal.

All I'm saying is that any person's opinion is just as valuable as anyone else's, particularly as far as this topic goes.
 
181 - 200 of 212 Posts
Top