• RBG@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    2·
    4 months ago

    I might miss the point, but the height is dependent on both parents genetically, so just comparing mothers with daughters is a bit like the usual “correlation does not equal causation” thingie, or not?

    • tehevilone@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      4 months ago

      The X and Y are just labeled weird, both graphs reference father’s height has the X and mother’s height as the Y

      • r_se_random@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        0·
        4 months ago

        Yeah, but there is no graph comparing son vs mother and daughter vs father.

        And it seems like an odd thing to omit.

        • tehevilone@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          4 months ago

          If I’m reading the referenced link right, the data is from 1886(?), so it’s not terribly recent, either.

          • Grubberfly 🔮@mander.xyzEnglish
            1·
            4 months ago

            yes, 928 children and 205 parents it seems.

            wonder how the trend shown here has changed in almost 150 years…

  • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayEnglish
    11·
    4 months ago

    I don’t really understand how to read this, so only 96% of 5’ 4" boys are taller than their 5’ 2" father? What?