Originally Posted by
mgcsinc
That's not what a P value tells you.
In any case, my point was simply that many experiments have bias (including self-selection bias), and all we're ever trying to get to is some measure of the likelihood that the observed pattern would happen from chance as opposed to from the null. No experiment conforms perfectly to the underlying assumptions used in statistical analysis. Doesn't keep us from drawing conclusions.
Point to any published peer reviewed study or article
anywhere that has drawn statistical conclusions as to the likelihood the association claimed was real vs being random (either a t-test or a p-value) where the data was collected by people self-selecting themselves into the study, or better yet simply posting on the internet.
You will not find anything that has been peer reviewed that does this in any field, nor will you find any authoritative source that says you can do these tests on such data. Bottom line, any "statistics" you pump out of a self-selected set of data is junk science.
I look forward to seeing what you come up with, I always like to be shown to be wrong.
and p.s. As I have said the information is interesting, I look at it, I've posted data, but don't delude yourself in anyway it is statistically significant or valid, it it not.