It's My Birthday and I'll Cry If I Want To!

No I won't cry. Well maybe not so much. Aaaaah! Omar came today and brought me the cuuuuuutest gifts. Not so much because they're cute in themselves (long toe socks in striped yellow and pink with stars and rainbows--uuuum....?) but because first, he went shopping, which he hates to do, second, I know he actually put some thought into what I would like, and third, because...oh I don't know. It's just cute ok! And now I officially sound like I'm in middle school. Great.

Whatever!

It's my birthday and I'll act-a-fool-when-everyone's-looking *gasp*...if I want to!

Sooo, I've never really been one for celebrations. I feel like that makes me a bit boring, but I don't know, it's never really been a big thing in my family. I feel so odd being the center of attention as well; it's sooooo weird. I've done the public speaker/limelight thing before; its not what I like to spend my time doing I guess.

Anyway, since I suppose this should actually be a SEE-U related journal entry (sorry I made you sit through the material above, dear reader), let's talk stats! Conclusion: I hate it. But I need it. Therefore I will learn to love it. Oh dear. I'm definitely learning Excel as we go, as I have no idea how to use it. The two-tailed test, for instance, is totally new to me--and just looking through the data analysis options I know stats is going to be a beast to tackle.

I'm still a bit confused about what scientific significance is. I mean I understand that statistical insignificance, assuming that two situations are different, would redirect us from that notion and tell us with greater certainty that the situations are actually similar. But if the literature says one thing, and our data says another, is that still scientifically significant? Or do we look first at potential flaws in our studies? Gah! But in our individual projects, for example, surely we can't be expected to have read all the literature and know what people have understood will occur/what the traits are of a situation, etc.?

Do "real" scientists even do that? I guess that's the function of peer-reviewed journals, since if your work actually gets so far as to be widely disseminated (as wide as you can get in a scientific niche), other scientists in the field will scrutinize your work for flaws...and scientific significance.