> It's easy to claim no evidence exists if you get to be really picky about which evidence you will accept.
It's easy to claim all of the evidence in the world exists when you're willing to accept very bad statistics and interpretations.
See how that works?
I'm very simply asking for something other than very obvious bad statistics or bad statistical interpretations. I think this is very important because bad stats or interpretations can cause bad policy decisions.
> Sociologists don't get clean room labs and from scratch experimental design for their studies and have to work with the available data.
Are you saying that this data can't exist, or can't even be attempted to be found? No sociologist has thought to even attempt to come up with a sample of this data to try and analyze this correctly? If this is the case, why?
> That "perfect" study you are looking for in fact can't quite exist because you can't control for all variables with respect to any systemic issue and variables like career and education are likely too deeply connected co-factors with housing.
Hold your horses, buddy. I'm not looking for some fictional "perfect" study. Every study, whether in physics or sociology, probably has flaws. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for an honest attempt to at least make a good statistical comparison.
> It doesn't sound like you have any interest in being convinced, and it sounds like you are happy being a contrarian here.
Mind-reading isn't a thing, but I'm generally a happy person, thank you.
