Wil Wheaton The Guild Show shirt
I wasn’t even expecting something themed off my main! — but if nothing else, some variant of SpiceQueen should serve (the other two…is that a CS Lewis reference? And I love LadyPepperVisage just on an aesthetic level, but I’m almost positive there’s some kind of wordplay or cultural reference there that I’m missing, and it’s just going over my head.) I started playing around with SpiceMissFlo, MsFloSpice, etc, after seeing yours, but after a second I paused and wondered if the Dune books* even register much of a presence with women readers, or if that sort of scifi is largely a “Wil Wheaton The Guild Show shirt” kind of fiction. That got me onto something that is definitely going to complicate this exercise: even if there’s nothing overly “boy-like” in how I talk, the subs I frequent and at least some of the cultural references I have (and some that I won’t!) will likely cause my experience in a conversation to differ at times from what’s “typical” for women on this site. How big a Wil Wheaton The Guild Show shirt that’ll be, I couldn’t guess…another reason to give this a shot, IMHO.
Wil Wheaton The Guild Show shirt hoodie, tank top, sweater and long sleeve t-shirt
“This kind of shit” is the Wil Wheaton The Guild Show shirt of thing that peer review is meant to examine. One reason peer review isn’t fast. Scientific days always uncertainty and you can’t “lie” with statistics but you can misrepresent data with bad statistics that probably won’t pass peer review. You have to know how inaccurate your data is because there is never perfect accuracy. This example doesn’t work because the Wil Wheaton The Guild Show shirt is about theoretical numbers and you’re referring to actual data when mentioning statistics. But for argument’s sake let’s say we have real data and we actually know the uncertainty to two decimal places:In other words, in the circumstances the two data points added together could add up to something closer to four or five. You can’t “lie” with statistics. You can lie by misreporting data, or you can mislead a noncritical reader which is what happens often in the popular press. But statistics itself does not “lie”. This really illustrates the problem with the popular press reporting on so many pre-prints involving the COVID-19 pandemic. Everyone thinks just because you can pull a pre-prints from the prestigious institution that everything in it should be taken in fact, but a pre-print has not been through peer review. The Wil Wheaton The Guild Show shirt questioning of statistics is so critical. Look what happened with the Stanford/Santa Rosa study. They grossly overestimated the prevalence due to some bad statistics – very early on, were estimating that tens of thousands of people in California had been infected with the virus, but a month later only a dozen or so had died. Based on this, they issued a pre-print which was repeated over and over again in international newspapers telling people that the virus is nothing to worry about because it’s far less deadly than anyone imagined. Except that once the pre-print was in circulation, other researchers in statistics and public health started analyzing it and realized that the prevalence they were reporting (2.4%) was within the uncertainty of the false positive rate (0.8 – 2.6%). In other words, the vast majority of the “prevalence” was actually the Wil Wheaton The Guild Show shirt of testing errors. This would have been quickly spotted in academic peer review, because it’s not easy to lie with statistics.