/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15392697
>Helgason's 2008 study on 200 years of icelandic marriage and birth records found that geographical proximity was only a proxy for relatedness, they found relatedness the strongest correlate and quite consistent over the generations studied.
Did you not notice wild variations every 25 years and flips between miniscule high-error fractions of children in figure C? This is the definition of a spurious correlation.
>I find the evidence seems to be there to support a possible mechanism involving group genetic similarity.
In spite of the fact what I presume to be your primary evidence has an effect size hovering around 0 with margins of error larger than the total range of variation at 95% CI. And only being a correlation.