48
Mean Height of 19yo Males in Select Countries, 1985-2019 (lemmy.world)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/dataisbeautiful@mander.xyz
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 6 months ago (13 children)

I mean everything is very clearly labeled and only 1 axis is cut, because without the cut you wouldn't see many differences in the top part.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 6 months ago (12 children)

    wouldn’t see many differences in the top part.

    you would see them, they just wouldn't look as massive as they do before you notice that the y axis does not start at zero. which is exactly the manipulation 101 i am talking about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago* (8 children)

    Who is zero centimeters tall though? Why would you start at zero when the data doesnt start at zero.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    Stop making sense!

    Good news everyone, this graph should start at zero as we are comparing humans to tardigrades.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    this graph doesn't compare heights, it compares speed of change and it is heavily distorted in this representation. you think you are delivering some sick burn, but you are just making fool of yourself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    It's not speed, it's the height over time. The derivative of this is the speed, and then the axis in this case should not start at 0, it should start at negative because there are periods where the speed is negative.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago* (3 children)

    It’s not speed, it’s the height over time

    yeah, it is not speed, it is unit over time, so, wait for it... speed.

    The derivative of this is the speed

    and its visual perception is distorted due to the truncated axis.

    it should start at negative because there are periods where the speed is negative.

    "where the speed is negative"? wait, what, i thought this is not speed - as per your first sentence. also, the axis should start at zero, because... at some point the height of the person was negative?

    well thank you for your input 😂

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

    Height as a function of time results in... Height. Delta height divided by Delta time is average speed. This is basic math.

    If this was speed, there would be points of negative speed, when height is lower at a greater time.

    I'm going to assume you're just a troll, nobody can be so dumb.

    Edit: just as an observation, if you want to look at the speed, the truncated axis is irrelevant, because the intersection value is derived to 0. You really don't know this?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (1 child)

    If this was speed, there would be points of negative speed, when height is lower at a greater time.

    there is no need for the height axis to start below zero just because there is negative speed at some point. i am going to assume you are just dumb, because i do believe people can be that dumb.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •