Here’s an article on sample sizes and why small sample sizes being used to represent an entire population is more often incorrect and a misrepresentation of data:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6970301/
You cannot claim that “these 10 sea kings have similar speeds therefore this other sea king must have that similar speed”. You are using an extremely small sample size to represent an entire population, there are plenty of scientific papers proving that to be unethical and wrong in terms of representing a population.
@KingTempest; We're not trying to piss you off. I'll step away from the thread for an hour or so.
I'm about to leave for work soon so get all your arguments out.
We're just explaining the issues as they appear to us. I know that your calculation is for what you see as the average Sea King, but I don't think it works out as simply as you're putting it.
Let me explain the calculation here since yall just refuse to read it for yourselves to the point of where you're even getting the wrong feat.
The calculation is a calc of the average sea king.
The average sea king is a serpentine creature relative to an eel in shape, except exponentially larger.
So what I did was find the mass of a serpentine creature relative to an eel in shape (the average).
An example of this is if I want to measure the attributes of the average human. I won't go to an obese or an anorexic, I would go to a human with relatively average qualities, height, mass, strength, etc. 1.70 meters, 62 kg, something around the average.
And I'm at the point where I'm tired of hearing "wiki standards" when
we do this same thing.
Someone
breaking a door or getting hit by a car or freefalling or breaking somebody's bones is assumed to use the average human dimensions and qualities, and we use this for every single human on this wiki. "Got hit by a car, broke somebody's beck, vaporized a person, froze a person, could withstand lava", we give them the yield, dura, speed.
Yes, speed,
we do this for speed. We do that on this wiki, all over.
So please, stop shoving the wiki's rules down my throat when a majority of the wiki uses these same things.
So now next is the speed.
Instead of me using a sample of Usain Bolt or something, I found something relative to my sample.
I found another serpentine sea king without outlandish qualities like orbiting wool on their necks or a ******* frog sea king, just a regular snake.
I then assumed the absolute lowest average value, as it said "at least 5km", so I used 5km.
@Arc7Kuroi, you keep bringing up sample size as if I calculated the average of a bunch of different people.
When we see a large number of a group moving at the same speed with varying qualities (all different lengths, widths, heights, masses, shapes), then we can make a
logical assumption that it would remain the same for something that is even more average for their species.
If I look at Usain Bolt, the Rock, Zendaya, Michael B Jordan, Michael Rainey Jr, Mark Henry, Yohan Blake, Big Show, Beyonce, Snoop Dog, Michael Jordan, Shaq, and many more people and I see that
somehow they're around the same speed, then I can look at another average person of their species (like Tom Holland, 5'8, 64 kg) and assume that he would be in the average of that group as well.
Yall are just being hyper critical against safe assumptions. I didn't calculate the fastest or most outlandish sea king that looks like a blowfish (like damage tried to say the one T Bone cut was) and say that's the average. The average sea king is a serpentine creature, so using another average sea king for an assumption of speed is not
- Calc Stacking
- A Non Average
- Against the Rules
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then
it probably can be treated like a duck instead of acting as if it's a brick or a boulder.
Or else, let's go shit on every single profile and common calculation that uses the average of anything
