For heterosexual couples in the U.S., meeting online has become the most popular way couples meet, eclipsing meeting through friends for the first time around 2013. Moreover, among the couples who meet online, the proportion who have met through the mediation of third persons has declined over time.

dontneedit123 · 2019-07-14T01:17:49+00:00

Thank God Tinder isn't real life though

Njere · 2019-07-14T03:37:28+00:00

I want to show this to every 35+ year old guy who says "I'm my day, we used to just go right up and talk to her"

OberOst · 2019-07-13T08:34:57+00:00

Here's the relevant graph from the text:

https://cdn1.imggmi.com/uploads/2019/7/13/c969f0e0c31555bb5d6779cd84a06260-full.png

SophisticatedBean · 2019-07-14T07:02:28+00:00

Previously discussed here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackPillScience/comments/bmxu2n/around_24_of_us_couples_formed_between_2015_and/

The fraction of couples who meet through online dating is "only" around 24%. The fraction of couples meeting online is around 40%, but it is very broadly defined:

"internet" by itself is unspecified internet

"Internet Dating" can include any matchmaking or personal ad sites, including non-romantic (like band seeking a drummer).

"Internet Games" include online games and not-quite-games virtual worlds like Second Life.

"Internet Chat" includes chat room, instant messenger, and even email. I did not check this when the meeting was clearly only a result of non-internet sources, with email happening only after the relationship had begun.

"Internet Org" is akin to voluntary orgs, but on the internet, and includes special interest web sites, online communities, online newsletters, etc, that are not specifically devoted to dating\matchmaking, social networking, or online games.

https://stacks.stanford.edu/file/druid:ns183dp7831/How_Q24_was_coded_updated.pdf

TotalBasturd · 2019-07-14T09:04:46+00:00

And we know how on-line dating works: https://imgur.com/a/eqGB7BZ

neomancr · 2019-07-15T05:58:02+00:00

Talk to any insider in science especially stats and you'll wisen up about their "surprising results".

https://imgur.com/a/xjGgZWJ

This doesn't just apply to stats but most scientists for instance the hydrogen project at LLNL will admit they have no faith that the project goal will ever be achieved and see it as just funding to carry out random experiments they can patent.

Stats is the dirtiest of the "scientists" and anyone whos taken a class in fundamental stats will have that drilled into them.

That's why even Sam clemens has his famous "there are lies damn lies and statistics"

There was a meta analysis that sought to "prove" that child abuse didn't have any negative effect in people. Of course it was torn to pieces but people still stand by it

People are so desperate to yield a "result"