Econ101 said:agman said:Econ101 said:Did Taylor test for causality? Did he test with granger causality test?
The test of causality, for those who do not know, is a test to determine if one variable came before another. This has to happen for one thing to cause another thing (actually, often the threat of one thing can cause another thing. Many times there does not have to be a mathematical causality, just a preponderance of evidence that it was the cause or that the threat of it was the cause).
Agman has repeatedly claimed that Taylor never tested for causality when in fact he did. If agman really had the trial transcripts, he would know this to be true. If he does have the transcripts and testimony, and has the ability to understand it, HE IS LYING EVERY TIME HE IMPLIES THIS!!!
Does this make Agman a perjuror? No. It is plain old deception. Agman is using an out of context statement by Taylor, just like SH continually does on my quote, to decieve everyone about the facts.
I did have the transcripts and I know my statement from the trail is true. Keep on searching, you will find the truth.
Agman, did Taylor test for causality with the granger test, yes or no?
I did have the transcripts and I know my statement from the trail is true. Keep on searching, you will find the truth.
Did Dr Taylor admit under oath during trail that he did not test his six manipulation theories for validity-yes or no? That has been the point of contention and it remains the point of contention. That question is answered in the TRIAL transcripts. Better luck next time.
He tested for causality. Do you deny it?
The validity of the claim was what the plaintiffs had to convince the jury of. They did. (MRJ are you going to tell me not to end a sentence with a preposition?)
The reasons (you call theories) were Tyson's reasons. Causality of their buying habits was tested by the granger test.
What kind of hoooeeey are you trying to sell, agman?
Another lie from Econ who did not evern read the testimony. "The reasons (you call theories) were Tyson's reasons. Causality of their buying habits was tested by the granger test."
Another fact "where did I say he did not perform the Grainer test? He also performed the Hausman test for causality-incorrectly I might say. Are these the reason the court said there were serious Daubert issues with his testimony? The judge was there, you were not. The judge is an expert in this type of testimony, the jury is not. The latter Daubert concerns are also a matter of record. Do you recall that comment in the Appellate Ruling or have you conveniently forgotten?
I am sorry to pop your bubble again but it was Taylor who said he had six theories not Tyson as you accuse. It was Taylor who stated under oath at trail under cross-exam and under oath that he did not test those theories for validity-not Tyson. You just cannot go through a day without lying or making a trumped up charge can you Econ?