Comments on: A detailed analysis of moves like Jagger's http://boingboing.net/2013/02/04/a-detailed-analysis-of-moves-l.html Brain candy for Happy Mutants Wed, 22 May 2013 15:30:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: cub http://boingboing.net/2013/02/04/a-detailed-analysis-of-moves-l.html#comment-1645718 cub Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:34:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=210618#comment-1645718  unless you get aroused by roosters on crack.  unless you get aroused by roosters on crack.

]]> By: franko http://boingboing.net/2013/02/04/a-detailed-analysis-of-moves-l.html#comment-1645695 franko Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:15:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=210618#comment-1645695 even looking at when he was young (you know, fifty years ago or so), i never understood the "sexy moves" thing attributed to the way jagger moves. nothing could be further from sexy to me. even looking at when he was young (you know, fifty years ago or so), i never understood the “sexy moves” thing attributed to the way jagger moves. nothing could be further from sexy to me.

]]> By: Luther Blissett http://boingboing.net/2013/02/04/a-detailed-analysis-of-moves-l.html#comment-1645559 Luther Blissett Mon, 04 Feb 2013 17:57:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=210618#comment-1645559 Rarely read a research paper with such a meager Methods section. They even don't define their basic statistics. Like, which correlation coefficient died they calculate, how the data was recorded and transformed, and so on and so on. I'm not going to jump on the "correlation is not causality" train. Sorry, Sir Mick: this is unsexy science, that is. Rarely read a research paper with such a meager Methods section. They even don’t define their basic statistics. Like, which correlation coefficient died they calculate, how the data was recorded and transformed, and so on and so on. I’m not going to jump on the “correlation is not causality” train.

Sorry, Sir Mick: this is unsexy science, that is.

]]>