I watched Alice in all her deliciousness and she kept mentioning things 
that can cause "Premature Death".

This got me on my soap box about the misuse of the word premature.

Lets face it no one considers their own death as anything but premature. 
Do you think the reaper comes up to a fit and wealthy 85 years old to be 
greeted as a friend. No !  They'll be screaming for their mummy like the 
rest of us.

So lets call "premature death" a pointless phrase because all death is 
premature. Are you in agreement ?

The other one is "premature ejaculation". Again fairly silly because to 
us men it's never premature. For us it's always just at the right time. 
And as we get paid more than women and run the world what we say goes 
:-)

So another redundant phrase is "premature ejaculation". Agreed ?


-- 
Edward Cowling   "Must go - A Grue Is About To Eat Me !!"

On 5 Sep, 19:23, Edward Cowling London UK
 wrote:
> I watched Alice in all her deliciousness and she kept mentioning things
> that can cause "Premature Death".
>
> This got me on my soap box about the misuse of the word premature.
>
> Lets face it no one considers their own death as anything but premature.
> Do you think the reaper comes up to a fit and wealthy 85 years old to be
> greeted as a friend. No !  They'll be screaming for their mummy like the
> rest of us.
>
> So lets call "premature death" a pointless phrase because all death is
> premature. Are you in agreement ?
>
No. 'Premature death' means dying well before one's average life
expectancy within your particular social environment.What 'so hard to
understand about that?

"Frank Booth Snr"  wrote in message 
news:fcafab22-c9f7-4f6a-b62d-500d9603696b@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On 5 Sep, 19:23, Edward Cowling London UK
>  wrote:
>> I watched Alice in all her deliciousness and she kept mentioning things
>> that can cause "Premature Death".
>>
>> This got me on my soap box about the misuse of the word premature.
>>
>> Lets face it no one considers their own death as anything but premature.
>> Do you think the reaper comes up to a fit and wealthy 85 years old to be
>> greeted as a friend. No !  They'll be screaming for their mummy like the
>> rest of us.
>>
>> So lets call "premature death" a pointless phrase because all death is
>> premature. Are you in agreement ?
>>
> No. 'Premature death' means dying well before one's average life
> expectancy within your particular social environment.What 'so hard to
> understand about that?

Obviously Edward has suffered from what's known as "Premature Brain Death".
Cheers
Jeff

"Frank Booth Snr"  wrote in message
news:fcafab22-c9f7-4f6a-b62d-500d9603696b@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On 5 Sep, 19:23, Edward Cowling London UK
>  wrote:
> > I watched Alice in all her deliciousness and she kept mentioning things
> > that can cause "Premature Death".
> >
> > This got me on my soap box about the misuse of the word premature.
> >
> > Lets face it no one considers their own death as anything but premature.
> > Do you think the reaper comes up to a fit and wealthy 85 years old to be
> > greeted as a friend. No !  They'll be screaming for their mummy like the
> > rest of us.
> >
> > So lets call "premature death" a pointless phrase because all death is
> > premature. Are you in agreement ?
> >

> No. 'Premature death' means dying well before one's average life
> expectancy within your particular social environment.What 'so hard to
> understand about that?

> > The other one is "premature ejaculation". Again fairly silly because to
> > us men it's never premature. For us it's always just at the right time.
> > And as we get paid more than women and run the world what we say goes


While "premature ejaculation" is shooting your bolt before you've even
got your trousers past your knees

So its 0 out of 2 there, I'm afraid.



michael adams

...

In message , michael adams 
 writes
>> >
>> > So lets call "premature death" a pointless phrase because all death is
>> > premature. Are you in agreement ?
>> >
>
>> No. 'Premature death' means dying well before one's average life
>> expectancy within your particular social environment.What 'so hard to
>> understand about that?
>
>> > The other one is "premature ejaculation". Again fairly silly because to
>> > us men it's never premature. For us it's always just at the right time.
>> > And as we get paid more than women and run the world what we say goes
>
>
>While "premature ejaculation" is shooting your bolt before you've even
>got your trousers past your knees
>
>So its 0 out of 2 there, I'm afraid.
>

Oi have you been talking to my wife ?  :-)

-- 
Edward Cowling   "Must go - A Grue Is About To Eat Me !!"

On Fri, 5 Sep 2008 11:48:48 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr wrote in
uk.media.tv.misc :

>On 5 Sep, 19:23, Edward Cowling London UK
> wrote:
>> I watched Alice in all her deliciousness and she kept mentioning things
>> that can cause "Premature Death".
>>
>> This got me on my soap box about the misuse of the word premature.
>>
>> Lets face it no one considers their own death as anything but premature.
>> Do you think the reaper comes up to a fit and wealthy 85 years old to be
>> greeted as a friend. No !  They'll be screaming for their mummy like the
>> rest of us.
>>
>> So lets call "premature death" a pointless phrase because all death is
>> premature. Are you in agreement ?
>>
>No. 'Premature death' means dying well before one's average life
>expectancy within your particular social environment.What 'so hard to
>understand about that?


By average do you mean normal? Would you care to expand on normal?

I'm with Edward. The only guarantee in life is death and it will
happen anytime from the moment of birth (stillbirth). The human body
is like any other organism and has a limited shelf life. Infinite
variables then kick in to shorten or lengthen that shelf life,
beginning with the genes you inherit and the environment you are born
into and then the lifestyle you lead.

Being lucky and being born into a society with advanced health care
might be a help but access to that health care needs to be regular.
Being born into a society with a less developed health care system
might mean you are less likely to be in an environment with more of
the life threatening variables (carcinogens in the air, water or food
system). 

Average is an arithmetical notion rendering the term premature
irrelevant.

For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
So what?

In message , Phil O'Sofa 
 writes
>
>For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>So what?
>

Now that cries out for more info ?

-- 
Edward Cowling   "Must go - A Grue Is About To Eat Me !!"

"Edward Cowling London UK"  wrote in message 
news:rGKv6vEvmjwIFwvm@genghis0.demon.co.uk...
> In message , Phil O'Sofa 
>  writes
>>
>>For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>>So what?
>>
>
> Now that cries out for more info ?

The majority of people will have the normal amount of limbs - 4. But a few 
will have 3, still less will have 2 and so on. But I would doubt any will 
have more than 4.
Therefore the average number of limbs will be something like 3.98 meaning 
the majority of people will have more than this.
Cheers
Jeff

Edward Cowling London UK wrote:
> 
> I watched Alice in all her deliciousness and she kept mentioning things
> that can cause "Premature Death".
> 
> This got me on my soap box about the misuse of the word premature.

Quite. "Premature death" assumes that there is "Mature death". Maybe there
will be one day, it is frightening. It will be sneaked in by mandatory 
voluntary euthanasia. My dad who lived to 90 appalled by the idea.

On 6 Sep, 01:07, Phil O'Sofa  wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Sep 2008 11:48:48 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr wrote in
> uk.media.tv.misc :
>
>
> By average do you mean normal? Would you care to expand on normal?
>
Normal=average=usual. Are you someone else who has problems
understanding basic English?

> I'm with Edward. The only guarantee in life is death and it will
> happen anytime from the moment of birth (stillbirth). The human body
> is like any other organism and has a limited shelf life. Infinite
> variables then kick in to shorten or lengthen that shelf life,
> beginning with the genes you inherit and the environment you are born
> into and then the lifestyle you lead.
>
Yes. So?

> Being lucky and being born into a society with advanced health care
> might be a help but access to that health care needs to be regular.
> Being born into a society with a less developed health care system
> might mean you are less likely to be in an environment with more of
> the life threatening variables (carcinogens in the air, water or food
> system).
>
Yes. So?

> Average is an arithmetical notion rendering the term premature
> irrelevant.
>
Erm, no it doesn't. Quite the contrary.You seem to have difficulty
understamding the application of averages.

> For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.

A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr 
wrote:

>> For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>
>A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
>people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>

The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
-- 

Martin

On 6 Sep, 14:19, Martin <m...@address.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr 
> wrote:
>
> >> For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>
> >A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>
> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
> --
I'd hope so. I do have an A level in Maths.

In article , 
me@address.invalid says...
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr 
> wrote:
> 
> >> For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
> >
> >A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
> >
> 
> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?

There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of 
limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than 4?).  
The mode must be 4.  The arithmetic mean is a fraction short of 4.  
Which average is less than 2?
-- 
SAm.

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 06:30:23 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr 
wrote:

>On 6 Sep, 14:19, Martin <m...@address.invalid> wrote:
>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr 
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>>
>> >A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
>> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>>
>> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
>> --
>I'd hope so. I do have an A level in Maths.

In the days when I passed A level maths, it was a common trick question.
-- 

Martin

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 14:40:12 +0100, Sam Nelson  wrote:

>In article , 
>me@address.invalid says...
>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> >> For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>> >
>> >A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
>> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>> >
>> 
>> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
>
>There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of 
>limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than 4?).  
>The mode must be 4.  The arithmetic mean is a fraction short of 4.  
>Which average is less than 2?

Considering that I typed two, when I meant four ... :o)
-- 

Martin

In message 
, 
Frank Booth Snr  writes
>On 6 Sep, 14:19, Martin <m...@address.invalid> wrote:
>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr 
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>>
>> >A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
>> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>>
>> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
>> --
>I'd hope so. I do have an A level in Maths.
>

Yeah, but is it pre 1990 when they were A levels or a modern GCSE grade 
5 equivalent ? :-)

-- 
Edward Cowling   "Must go - Gordon Brown Just Resigned  !!"

"Sam Nelson"  wrote in message 
news:MPG.232c989b37782432989898@news.zen.co.uk...

> There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of
> limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than 4?).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1026760/Baby-born-limbs-takes-steps-life-saving-surgery.html
Cheers
Jeff

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 14:55:24 +0100, Edward Cowling London UK
 wrote:

>In message 
>, 
>Frank Booth Snr  writes
>>On 6 Sep, 14:19, Martin <m...@address.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>>>
>>> >A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
>>> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>>>
>>> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
>>> --
>>I'd hope so. I do have an A level in Maths.
>>
>
>Yeah, but is it pre 1990 when they were A levels or a modern GCSE grade 
>5 equivalent ? :-)

I passed A level maths in the 1950s when a substantial number failed and only a
small percentage got over 90%
-- 

Martin

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:11:06 +0200, "Jeff Lawrence" 
wrote:

>"Sam Nelson"  wrote in message 
>news:MPG.232c989b37782432989898@news.zen.co.uk...
>
>> There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of
>> limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than 4?).
>
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1026760/Baby-born-limbs-takes-steps-life-saving-surgery.html

You can count on the Daily Mail :)
-- 

Martin

"Martin" <me@address.invalid> wrote in message 
news:3b45c4llel8fc3ad18gbpqslpv9obsq0a8@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:11:06 +0200, "Jeff Lawrence" 
> 
> wrote:
>
>>"Sam Nelson"  wrote in message
>>news:MPG.232c989b37782432989898@news.zen.co.uk...
>>
>>> There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of
>>> limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than 4?).
>>
>>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1026760/Baby-born-limbs-takes-steps-life-saving-surgery.html
>
> You can count on the Daily Mail :)

And on that babies limbs.
Cheers
Jeff

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:22:20 +0200, "Jeff Lawrence" 
wrote:

>"Martin" <me@address.invalid> wrote in message 
>news:3b45c4llel8fc3ad18gbpqslpv9obsq0a8@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:11:06 +0200, "Jeff Lawrence" 
>> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>"Sam Nelson"  wrote in message
>>>news:MPG.232c989b37782432989898@news.zen.co.uk...
>>>
>>>> There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of
>>>> limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than 4?).
>>>
>>>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1026760/Baby-born-limbs-takes-steps-life-saving-surgery.html
>>
>> You can count on the Daily Mail :)
>
>And on that babies limbs.

The Daily Mail hit an all time low today, until the next one on Monday.
-- 

Martin

In article <48c28f7f$0$54385$dbd49001@news.wanadoo.nl>, 
jeff.lawrence@orange.nl says...
> "Sam Nelson"  wrote in message 
> news:MPG.232c989b37782432989898@news.zen.co.uk...
> 
> > There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of
> > limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than 4?).
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1026760/Baby-born-limbs-takes-steps-life-saving-surgery.html

So, she single-handedly (NPI) bumped the median to 4, for a while.  I 
guess assuming the median is ever as low as 2 is unsafe.
-- 
SAm.

In message , Martin 
<me@address.invalid> writes
>>>> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>>>>
>>>> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
>>>> --
>>>I'd hope so. I do have an A level in Maths.
>>>
>>
>>Yeah, but is it pre 1990 when they were A levels or a modern GCSE grade
>>5 equivalent ? :-)
>
>I passed A level maths in the 1950s when a substantial number failed and only a
>small percentage got over 90%

A fellow old fart :-)  Well done that man. Now they give A levels away 
with a gallon of oil.

-- 
Edward Cowling   "Must go - Gordon Brown Just Resigned  !!"

On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 19:23:42 +0100, Edward Cowling London UK wrote:

> I watched Alice in all her deliciousness and she kept mentioning things
> that can cause "Premature Death".

Lusting after Alice?

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:05:09 +0100, Edward Cowling London UK
 wrote:

>In message , Martin 
><me@address.invalid> writes
>>>>> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>>>>>
>>>>> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
>>>>> --
>>>>I'd hope so. I do have an A level in Maths.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah, but is it pre 1990 when they were A levels or a modern GCSE grade
>>>5 equivalent ? :-)
>>
>>I passed A level maths in the 1950s when a substantial number failed and only a
>>small percentage got over 90%
>
>A fellow old fart :-)  Well done that man. Now they give A levels away 
>with a gallon of oil.

AFAIR the results were normalised so that 50% was  the mean on a normal
distribution.
-- 

Martin

Sam Nelson wrote:
> In article ,
> me@address.invalid says...
>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr
>>  wrote:
>>
>>>> For instance, most people have more than the average number of
>>>> limbs.
>>>
>>> A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
>>> people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>>>
>>
>> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand
>> averages?
>
> There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of
> limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than
> 4?).

No, the median is 4 limbs - if you ranked the entire human race by number of 
limbs, the person halfway down the queue would have 4 limbs.

"John Rowland"  wrote in message 
news:g9u990$a8o$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...

> No, the median is 4 limbs - if you ranked the entire human race by number 
> of limbs, the person halfway down the queue would have 4 limbs.

It costs an arm and a leg to end up near the back though.
Cheers
Jeff

In article , 
me@address.invalid says...
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:05:09 +0100, Edward Cowling London UK
>  wrote:
> >A fellow old fart :-)  Well done that man. Now they give A levels away 
> >with a gallon of oil.
> 
> AFAIR the results were normalised so that 50% was  the mean on a normal
> distribution.

So, if you happened to take A-levels in a better-than-average year, you 
were stuffed, and in a worse-than-average year you looked good even if 
you were a dimwit.  Is that better than the current situation?
-- 
SAm.

In article <g9u990$a8o$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>, 
johnr@journeyflow.spamspam.demon.co.uk says...
> Sam Nelson wrote:
> > There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of
> > limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than
> > 4?).
> 
> No, the median is 4 limbs - if you ranked the entire human race by number of 
> limbs, the person halfway down the queue would have 4 limbs.

Oh.  Er.  Duh.  I got mixed up there, clearly.
-- 
SAm.

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 18:01:58 +0200, "Jeff Lawrence" 
wrote:

>"John Rowland"  wrote in message 
>news:g9u990$a8o$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
>
>> No, the median is 4 limbs - if you ranked the entire human race by number 
>> of limbs, the person halfway down the queue would have 4 limbs.
>
>It costs an arm and a leg to end up near the back though.

and some wouldn't have a leg to stand on. The lucky ones would have a leg over.
-- 

Martin

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:09:07 +0100, in uk.media.tv.misc, "John Rowland"
 arranged some electrons, so they looked like
this:

 ... Sam Nelson wrote:
 ... > In article ,
 ... > me@address.invalid says...
 ... >> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr
 ... >>  wrote:
 ... >>
 ... >>>> For instance, most people have more than the average number of
 ... >>>> limbs.
 ... >>>
 ... >>> A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
 ... >>> people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
 ... >>>
 ... >>
 ... >> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand
 ... >> averages?
 ... >
 ... > There are lots of different kinds of `average'.  The median number of
 ... > limbs is presumably 2 (is there anyone on the planet with more than
 ... > 4?).
 ... 
 ... No, the median is 4 limbs 

The median can't be 4. People can lose limbs, but they can't grow a 5th (6th, 7th...) one.

Some people are even born without a limb or four, at that.


- if you ranked the entire human race by number of 
 ... limbs, the person halfway down the queue would have 4 limbs.
 ... 
 ... 
 ... 
 ... 
 ... ---
 ... avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
 ... Virus Database (VPS): 080905-0, 05/09/2008
 ... Tested on: 06/09/2008 18:04:18
 ... avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software.
 ... http://www.avast.com
 ... 
 ... 

=====
It sounds much better in French, but then, everything does.

"Magda" <pikrodafni@death_to_spammers_noos.fr.invalid> wrote in message 
news:ded5c45isnjtlvltvntrie8scpvpiap1j9@4ax.com...

> The median can't be 4. People can lose limbs, but they can't grow a 5th 
> (6th, 7th...) one.

The mean can't be 4, but the median (and mode) can. And are.
Cheers
Jeff

"Jeff Lawrence"  wrote in message 
news:48c2bf1d$0$53772$dbd43001@news.wanadoo.nl...
> "Magda" <pikrodafni@death_to_spammers_noos.fr.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:ded5c45isnjtlvltvntrie8scpvpiap1j9@4ax.com...
>
>> The median can't be 4. People can lose limbs, but they can't grow a 5th 
>> (6th, 7th...) one.
>
> The mean can't be 4, but the median (and mode) can. And are.

Also, people can be born with more than 4 limbs. For example the Indian baby 
with 8 that I linked to earlier.
Cheers
Jeff

On 6 Sep, 14:55, Edward Cowling London UK
 wrote:
> In message
> ,
> Frank Booth Snr  writes
>
> >On 6 Sep, 14:19, Martin <m...@address.invalid> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Frank Booth Snr 
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>
> >> >A nonsensical, contradictory statement. So you're familiar with many
> >> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>
> >> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
> >> --
> >I'd hope so. I do have an A level in Maths.
>
> Yeah, but is it pre 1990 when they were A levels or a modern GCSE grade
> 5 equivalent ? :-)
>
> --
> Edward Cowling   "Must go - Gordon Brown Just Resigned  !!"

I presume 1970 passes "your" test then, which included a paper on
Stats.

On 6 Sep, 16:50, Martin <m...@address.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:05:09 +0100, Edward Cowling London UK
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> >In message , Martin
> ><m...@address.invalid> writes
> >>>>> >people who have 3 legs or 4 arms??...duh??
>
> >>>>> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
> >>>>> --
> >>>>I'd hope so. I do have an A level in Maths.
>
> >>>Yeah, but is it pre 1990 when they were A levels or a modern GCSE grade
> >>>5 equivalent ? :-)
>
> >>I passed A level maths in the 1950s when a substantial number failed and only a
> >>small percentage got over 90%
>
> >A fellow old fart :-)  Well done that man. Now they give A levels away
> >with a gallon of oil.
>
> AFAIR the results were normalised so that 50% was  the mean on a normal
> distribution.
 Which brings us back to the point that the average no. of human limbs
is about 3.9999999, which strangely enough is just about 4. So arguing
that most people have above the average number of limbs is pedantic
and stupid.

In message 
, 
Frank Booth Snr  writes
>>
>> >> The average number is less than two. Are you sure you understand averages?
>> >> --
>> >I'd hope so. I do have an A level in Maths.
>>
>> Yeah, but is it pre 1990 when they were A levels or a modern GCSE grade
>> 5 equivalent ? :-)
>>
>> --
>> Edward Cowling   "Must go - Gordon Brown Just Resigned  !!"
>
>I presume 1970 passes "your" test then, which included a paper on
>Stats.

Ooooo parametric or non parametric stats ?? ;-)

-- 
Edward Cowling   "Must go - Gordon Brown Just Resigned  !!"

On Sep 6, 9:19 am, "Jeff Lawrence"  wrote:
> "Edward Cowling London UK"  wrote in messagenews:rGKv6vEvmjwIFwvm@genghis0.demon.co.uk...
>
> > In message , Phil O'Sofa
> >  writes
>
> >>For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
> >>So what?
>
> > Now that cries out for more info ?
>
> The majority of people will have the normal amount of limbs - 4. But a few
> will have 3, still less will have 2 and so on. But I would doubt any will
> have more than 4.
> Therefore the average number of limbs will be something like 3.98 meaning
> the majority of people will have more than this.
> Cheers
> Jeff

But the term 'average' in that context is a bit makie-uppie &
meaningless. Human beings will have 2 upper limbs & 2 lower limbs by
default.

Premature death, as explained earlier, is dying before you're supposed
to based on all the certain parameters. So dying before that is
premature.

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 00:21:19 -0700 (PDT), Stephen@mailinator.com wrote
in uk.media.tv.misc :

>On Sep 6, 9:19 am, "Jeff Lawrence"  wrote:
>> "Edward Cowling London UK"  wrote in messagenews:rGKv6vEvmjwIFwvm@genghis0.demon.co.uk...
>>
>> > In message , Phil O'Sofa
>> >  writes
>>
>> >>For instance, most people have more than the average number of limbs.
>> >>So what?
>>
>> > Now that cries out for more info ?
>>
>> The majority of people will have the normal amount of limbs - 4. But a few
>> will have 3, still less will have 2 and so on. But I would doubt any will
>> have more than 4.
>> Therefore the average number of limbs will be something like 3.98 meaning
>> the majority of people will have more than this.
>> Cheers
>> Jeff
>
>But the term 'average' in that context is a bit makie-uppie &
>meaningless. Human beings will have 2 upper limbs & 2 lower limbs by
>default.
>
>Premature death, as explained earlier, is dying before you're supposed
>to based on all the certain parameters. So dying before that is
>premature.


Just as the term average in the Frank's OP is irrelevant.

Frank said:

>'Premature death' means dying well before one's average life
>expectancy within your particular social environment.What 'so hard to
>understand about that?


One's average life expectancy? I only have one life and it can not be
averaged. I will not get a chance to start again or to vary the end
point. For a total volume of one whatever the final chronological
number is, is whatever the average will be.

When your ticket is up your ticket is up. David Niven in A Matter of
Life and Death and Warren Beatty in Heaven Can Wait are simple light
entertainment movies and not "How to get a second chance"
documentaries.