Correlation Is Not Causation
In Statistics and in all of our Science Classes in college, they repeatedly keep saying that Correlation Is NOT Causation.
This is one of the fundamental axioms of Statistics and Science – correlation is not causation. They typically introduce correlation early in a statistics class, right after they get done with the definitions, because correlation is such a powerful scientific tool. Correlation also shows up in every Science class whenever they start talking about the difference between observational studies and science experiments. Correlation is the scientific study of the relationship between two variables.
Pagano, R.R. (2010). Understanding Statistics in the Behavioral Sciences (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Aside from the practical utility of using a relationship for prediction, why would anyone be interested in determining whether two variables are related? One important reason is that if the variables are related, it is possible that one of them is the cause of the other. As we shall see later in this chapter, the fact that two variables are related is not sufficient basis for proving causality.
Nevertheless, because correlational studies are among the easiest to carry out, showing that a correlation exists between the variables is often the first step toward proving that they are causally related. Conversely, if a correlation does not exist between the two variables, a causal relationship can be ruled out. (Understanding Statistics, p. 114.)
Did you catch that?
In a science experiment, if there is NO correlation between your independent variable and your dependent variable, then a causal relationship can be ruled out. That’s the end of it.
If there is no correlation then there is no causation.
That’s powerful Science!
That’s powerful Philosophy of Science.
Yet, what do we observed from the false and falsified philosophies of science or interpretations of science?
We OBSERVE the Materialists, Naturalists, Darwinists, Nihilists, and Atheists taking correlation of any kind and turning it into causation. They notice a correlation between the fossil record and life forms, and then they jump straight to the conclusion that Evolution or Random Chance produced the fossil record and the life forms. This is what they do, do they not? They jump to the conclusion that CHANCE caused or produced everything that exists in this universe. They literally turn correlation into causation, and they do this every day of their lives. Do they not? Is that not what we have experienced and observed from these people? They take the slightest correlation, and then they turn it into causation.
They call it a Scientific Inference. They infer that Evolution or Random Chance produced the fossil record, the proteins, the genomes, the brains, and the life forms because they notice a correlation; and then, they employ the begging the question logic fallacy and USE their Scientific Inference as evidence and proof that their conclusions are true.
That’s how they trick themselves and deceive themselves. The Darwinists and Naturalists do this every day of their lives, and they don’t even know it.
Pinel, J. (2014). Biopsychology (9th ed.). New York: Pearson.
Scientific inference is the fundamental method of biopsychology and of most other sciences [like the theory of evolution] – it is what makes being a scientist fun.
The empirical method that biopsychologists and other scientists use to study the unobservable is called scientific inference.
The fact that the neural mechanisms of behavior [and evolution] cannot be directly observed and must be studied through scientific inference is what makes biopsychological research such a challenge – and as I said before, so much fun. (Biopsychology, p. 13.)
Unbelievable!
This person literally turned Scientific Inferences or Begging the Question INTO an empirical method or a scientific method. It violates everything that science and statistics stands for! This is Bad Science! This is the very definition of Bad Science. This is what the Materialists, Naturalists, Darwinists, Nihilists, and Atheists do every day of their lives, whether they know it or not. They turn their Conclusions or their Scientific Inferences into evidence and PROOF.
Scientific Inference is a logic fallacy – the logic fallacy that we call begging the question.
The whole of Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Atheism, the Theory of Evolution, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics are nothing more than a Scientific Inference. They are philosophies of science or interpretations of science. They are NOT science, because they start with the conclusion that CHANCE ALONE produced everything that exists in this universe. These people don’t do science. They jump straight to the conclusion that CHANCE caused everything that exists. That’s not science. That’s philosophy, religion, and dogma.
Kalat, J. W. (2008). Introduction to Psychology (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. “The brain is the product of Evolution.” (p. 12).
How do you know? Because I say so!
Pinel, J. (2014). Biopsychology (9th ed.). New York: Pearson. “Genetic endowment is a product of its evolution.” (p. 24).
Siegler, R., DeLoache, J., & Eisenberg, N. (2010). How Children Develop, (3rd ed.). New York: Worth.
The obvious question is: Why does the human brain – the product of millions of years of evolution – take such a devious developmental path, producing a huge excess of synapses, only to get rid of a substantial portion of them? The answer appears to be evolutionary economy. (p. 110).
Appears to be!
Notice how they turned correlation into causation! They turned appearances or inferences into causation. That’s how they do their science. What’s obvious is that they are begging the question. They used appearances and inferences as scientific evidence and as proof that their pre-chosen conclusions are true.
Notice how they ALWAYS jump to conclusions and start with the conclusion that Evolution or Random Chance produced the human brain. That’s begging the question, and that’s a logic fallacy.
Well, let’s jump to some conclusions ourselves, and see what we get. Anyone can do it. It takes no expertise to make Scientific Inferences. Scientists do so all the time. That’s how they lie to us and get away with it. They call it a Scientific Inference.
Notice that for millions of years while evolution was making our brains, we didn’t have a brain. So, how did we survive and become the fittest animals on the planet when we didn’t have a brain for millions of years? It also took millions of years for evolution to make our eyes, so for millions of years we were both dumb and blind. So, how did we survive for millions of years while we were blind and didn’t have a brain? How did we breathe? How did we walk? How did we eat? How did we reproduce? We didn’t have eyes or a brain for millions of years, so how did we survive and become top of the food chain? The Theory of Evolution is self-defeating and self-falsifying, and they don’t even know it. It consists of nothing but lies or logic fallacies. It has no substance.
By using logic fallacies, we can produce any conclusion or any interpretation of the scientific data and scientific observations that we want. It’s called Scientific Inference, and it’s begging the question. It’s turning correlation into causation!
Begging the question MEANS that you take your Conclusion or your Scientific Inference, and then you USE your Conclusion or Scientific Inference as PROOF or as EVIDENCE that your Conclusion or Scientific Inference is true. It’s circular reasoning, which is yet another logic fallacy. That’s how the Darwinists and Naturalists do their science. That’s how they trick themselves and deceive themselves. They are cheating and lying, and most of them don’t even know it. Yes, there are those who KNOW that they are lying to us, but most of them have been tricked and deceived just as we have been tricked and deceived by them.
Correlation is not causation. But whenever the Materialists, Naturalists, Darwinists, Nihilists, and Atheists see even the slightest amount of correlation, they automatically jump to the conclusion that CHANCE caused that correlation. Technically, they are right – chance most likely produced the correlation that they are observing – but they are completely WRONG to assume that CHANCE can do causation. That’s where they FAIL – by turning correlation into causation; and, they do it every day of their lives until they finally figure out that it’s wrong. I KNOW because I used to be a materialist, naturalist, nihilist, and atheist. I KNOW how they think and act, because I used to be one of them.
It’s when these people jump to conclusions or beg the question and conclude that CHANCE caused the fossil record, the proteins, the genomes, the brains, and the life forms – that’s where they go WRONG and FAIL. That’s how they produce their faulty interpretations of science or their falsified philosophies of science in the first place. They beg the question and USE their Scientific Inferences or their Conclusions as PROOF or as EVIDENCE that their Conclusion or Scientific Inference is true. They equate correlation with causation, and they don’t even know that they are doing it.
The axiom stating that correlation cannot do causation is the foundation for every science experiment.
The Null Hypothesis in every science experiment has a correlation coefficient equal to ZERO or close to ZERO. The Null Hypothesis is a correlation coefficient of ZERO or NO causation. A correlation coefficient of ZERO between our independent variable and our dependent variable means that a causal relationship can be ruled out. If there is NO correlation between our variables, then there is NO causation or NO causal relationship between our variables. The Null Hypothesis means that there is ZERO correlation between the independent and dependent variables. The Null Hypothesis means that the independent variable produces NO EFFECT on the dependent variable. The Null Hypothesis means that there is NO causal relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable. It’s that simple. That’s how we do Science and Science Experiments! Or, at least that’s how we should do them.
But, that’s NOT how the Materialists, Naturalists, Atheists, and Darwinists do and interpret their science experiments. Instead, these people jump straight to the conclusion that CHANCE caused or produced everything that exists in our universe, including the proteins, genes, genomes, eyes, brains, and life forms. They cheat. They turn correlation into causation every time. They literally use the Null Hypothesis as PROOF that their Alternative Hypothesis (Causation by Evolution or Causation by Chance) is true. That’s what they do, is it not?
If they notice the slightest correlation, they turn it into causation. Then after they have run their science experiments and have discovered some type of causation within their data, they jump to the conclusion that their Alternative Hypothesis is true, and that CHANCE is the cause of their Alternative Hypothesis. This too is how they FAIL and end up with the faulty conclusion that CHANCE caused the results of their science experiment. They literally use the Null Hypothesis as their Alternative Hypothesis.
The Null Hypothesis in a science experiment represents CHANCE, and the Alternative Hypothesis in a science experiment represents CAUSATION. Chance and causation are mutually exclusive, which means that the Null Hypothesis and the Alternative Hypothesis are mutually exclusive.
The Null Hypothesis means that there is ZERO correlation between the independent variable and the dependent variable! The Null Hypothesis therefore means that there is NO causal relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable. The Null Hypothesis means that the independent variable has NO EFFECT on the dependent variable.
The Materialists, Naturalists, Darwinists, Nihilists, and Atheists toss all of this out the window and start with the conclusion that CHANCE can design and create anything if given enough time to do so. That’s what they teach, preach, and believe. Is it not? These people literally use the Null Hypothesis to PROVE the truthfulness of their Alternative Hypothesis. They literally use the Null Hypothesis as their Alternative Hypothesis. That’s begging the question. They jump straight to the conclusion that CHANCE produced the results of their science experiment, which means that they start with the conclusion that CHANCE caused the results of their science experiment. When it matters most, these people equate chance with causation every time. That’s how they choose to interpret their science. This is what they do, is it not?
By definition or by axiom, the Null Hypothesis is produced by chance alone; and therefore, a Null Hypothesis produces ZERO correlation between the independent variable and the dependent variable, thereby ruling out any causal relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable. The Null Hypothesis states that our independent variable has NO EFFECT on our dependent variable. In truth, the Null Hypothesis states that chance cannot do causation. By definition, the Null Hypothesis or Chance produces ZERO correlation. The Null Hypothesis or Chance can’t even do proper correlation, let alone causation. Powerful, is it not? That’s how we separate the truths from the lies in our science experiments while interpreting the results of our science experiments.
But what do we OBSERVE from the Materialists, Naturalists, Darwinists, Nihilists, and Atheists? Whenever they see some type of causation within the data from their science experiment, they automatically jump to the conclusion that Evolution or Random Chance CAUSED their Alternative Hypothesis to be true. These people literally USE the Null Hypothesis (or Chance) as their Alternative Hypothesis every time, and they always jump to the conclusion that CHANCE produced everything that we experience and observe in this universe.
These people are lying to us and deceiving us all the time, and I finally figured out how they are doing it and getting away with it. Here I put the truth and the lies side-by-side in the hope that some of us will learn how to discern the difference between the two.
Scientists lie, and we need to learn how to detect when they are lying to us and when they are not. Here in this short essay, we produced a powerful and incontrovertible TEST of truth assertions that quickly tells us when our college professors and the scientists are lying to us. Anytime a scientist or college professor is using Chance or the Null Hypothesis to do causation or to prove that chance is doing causation, then you automatically KNOW that he or she is lying to you, because Chance or the Null Hypothesis by definition cannot do causation. Chance and causation are mutually exclusive and exhaustive. They falsify each other.
That’s what I got from my Statistics class. Did you get that from your Statistics class too? If not, why not? What were they trying to hide from you?
This simple TEST for truth assertions is also a Scientific Method. There are many different types of Scientific Methods or scientific methodologies that we can use to help us to get at the truth. This is one of them. I automatically KNOW that these people are lying to us whenever they start using chance to do causation. Now you KNOW it too.
They can’t deceive you anymore, once you know how they are doing it and how they have been getting away with it.
Knowing about this won’t help you in any of your Science classes, because these people want you to accept the lie and believe the lie. They will expect you to keep lying right along with them. They will demand nothing less. They will fail you if you refuse to go along. That’s how they operate. But, knowing that chance can never do causation will help you to KNOW immediately whenever these people are lying to you, or trying their best to teach you the truth.
Mark My Words
The Next Essay in this Truth in Science Series