I really loved my Statistics class in college. Fortunately, our professor focused on more than just chi squares -- one of our assignments for the semester was to, by the end of the semester, find an argument in public discourse that misused statistics and show why the data didn't support the argument.
If that professor is still using that method to show students how misapplied statistics can bolster an argument, his students should have a field day with the recent crowing from the Right about "forcing" Cecile Richards to "admit" that abortion revenue at Planned Parenthood is approximately $262 million a year (another estimate has it at about $168 million). They don't realize that the more of their income that comes from abortions, the more likely it is that abortion revenue is subsidizing the preventative health services that taxpayer money is supposed to pay for, instead of the reverse.
Already the high figure touted by the Right has been demonstrated, if accurate, to prove abortion revenues pay for not just the entire cost to Planned Parenthood for providing them and any other services to an abortion patient that year, but also services provided to 380,000 more non-abortion patients.
I'd like to address a few other misapplications of statistics used to argue for myths in the abortion debate here -- and why those same numbers prove the forced birthers are incorrect.
the lies will never stop coming from the republican front yard, when you lie with impunity you really don't care about facts or research so you end up like republicans getting every negative thing they spew getting rebutted. there are the myths and busters in te article please read and further your awareness of what you have been misinformed ah hell lied to about right to life platform of deception.
pay attention to the one about Planned Parenthood's revenues from abortions but strap yourself in because it is a roflyao republican oop's moment of not doing their homework or just ignorance by the numbers.