Leicestershire statistics ....

[dubaiguy]

Was just looking at the stats on the Leicester 'Speed Camera' site.
What a load of rubbish .... can anyone tell me what this graph tells you? And ridiculously outdated to boot.
They have simply taken the highest month for 'offences' and a 3 year record of accidents ......... there is absolutely NO correlation ........ BUT I guess they think the average person will look at it and think cameras work as there is such a large difference in the actual graph bars............. dummies!

[BliarOut]

Write to them and point this out. It's your duty

Besides, I can't be arsed, they'll only lie.

[wanty1974]

That is a superb example of what happens when a statistics numpty is let loose with Excel. A graph that tells you bugger all. Thank you Bill Gates!

[james_j]

Crooked b@5tards.

Still, they're only protecting their cushy jobs funded by the camera gravy train.

[Mr2Mike]

Unbeliveable. Just take any set of data, arrange in decreasing order and dish it out to a (mostly) gullible public.

I do love the heading STATISTICS at the top of the chart though, says everything really.

[autismuk]

dubaiguy said:

Was just looking at the stats on the Leicester 'Speed Camera' site. What a load of rubbish .... can anyone tell me what this graph tells you? And ridiculously outdated to boot. They have simply taken the highest month for 'offences' and a 3 year record of accidents ......... there is absolutely NO correlation ........ BUT I guess they think the average person will look at it and think cameras work as there is such a large difference in the actual graph bars............. dummies!

Even then it doesn't work.... the post camera figures are much higher. Mind you , the plankton won't read the labels, I suppose.

Norfolk (where I reside) did something slightly less absurd. Comparing the accident numbers in the three years prior to cameras with the six months afterwards....