The Null Hypothesis makes sense when applied... well, sensibly. While correlation is a necessary prerequisite for causation, correlation does not necessarily indicate causation.
For any two correlated events, A and B, the different possible relationships include:
- A causes B (direct causation);
- B causes A (reverse causation);
- A and B are consequences of a common cause, but do not cause each other;
- A and B both causes C, which is (explicitly or implicitly) conditioned on.;
- A causes B and B causes A (bidirectional or cyclic causation);
- A causes C which causes B (indirect causation);
- There is no connection between A and B; the correlation is a coincidence.
'Twas another pit bull mauling in OK a few days ago. An elderly woman walking her dog was killed by 2 at-large pit bulls. Her head was nearly removed from her body.
Of course, those coming to the defense of those dogs, and those like them, insist that the breed background of the mutt perpetrators had nothing to do with it. Indeed, it was just something that happened. Like having it rain on your birthday. The fact that the dogs involved had the capacity to decapitate somebody was merely a coincidence. Hey, she could had her head cut off by a goldfish, right?
Remember, according to dog worshippers and pit bull fanatics, the facts that pit bulls were bred to fight, and have the overall physical capacity to take down a grown man have nothing to do with any of this carnage. To them, horrific events of this sort are strictly a coincidence. Remember, its not pit bulls that kill, or even dogs. Hell its not even mammals, or anything alive! The victim in question could have died of anything, and the fact that this death involved game bred fight dogs with a bite strength of an industrial hydraulic press was strictly a coincidence. The physical capacity and breed history of pit bulls to fight to the death is not implicated in any way, ever. This is the Null Hypothesis of almost every dog mauling.
Dog apologists and pit bull fanatics always try to act and sound smart. I consider most of them to be a "95 IQ genius'" at best. If you are on a forum and need a retort, try this: "You are abusing the Null Hypothesis". I dunno if that IS smart, but it sure SOUNDS smart, doesn't it?
Have a great week!