Its irrelevant. I never made any statements about ‘all’ Mullahs. Therefore any discussion that centers around ‘all’ Mullahs is completely irrelevant and uninteresting for me. Please dont include me in your thoughts about all Mullahs. When you say things like:
**Here the discussion merges. Neither me nor you talk about all. **
That gives a false impression to you that you have proved something I was contesting, whereas you have simply affirmed something that was never in dispute, and that is a completely uninteresting and irrelevant discussion for me.
I asked you earlier what problem you had with my position that there are minority of minority and fake mullahs. That is being discussed now.
The question of ‘fake’ and ‘real’ is one you’ve started. Its a silly characterization, makes molvies sound like goods produced in China. Right/wrong, correct/incorrect, mental/normal, fasadi/anamolous are fine by me 
**Again you have failed to get what fake mullah means and lets just use your terms here.
Wrong, incorrect, mental, fasadi ‘mullahs’ are Fake!
Did that help?
**
I dont even know what ‘two’ you are referencing. Its very simple, I used median and typical (every time) in close proximity, and that should give you an indication of how to understand the word. Please google the wordstypical and median, and understand that when people say typical that does not mean ‘minority of a minority’.
**The post 46 and yor answer in 47 talks about these two points.
Now it is you to prove these fake ones are so common that you are hell bent on using term like median or typical.**
That sounds like a it is so because I say it is so statement. I wouldnt go so far as to characterize majority vs minority.. I’ll stick with the word typical, since it has less assumptions, and has a clear, English-language meaning. A typical person is Han Chinese, but a majority of people are not Han Chinese.
**I almost fell off the chair looking at this video telling me a 28 years old Han is typical person in the world.
Did you even read why these dorky people think this person is typical person in a population of 7 billion?
Forget about 7 billion, just read the reasons they gave.
If you and I sit at home and change those parameters, even you and I can become typical persons in this world. (I know it is a stretch but the essential point remains same) 
Another absurdity you brought in simple discussion which reality based people can easily refute.
That is why statistics is not solid science. 
ravage! Seriously, which school did you attend being so gullible?**
Theres plenty of poetry by Iqbal critical of Mullay, and in no way is it specified that hes talking about a ‘minority of minority’. See here for a collection of Iqbal poetry specifically criticizing the influence of Mullay.
http://www.allamaiqbal.com/webcont/393/ONEXPOSINGCHARACTEROFSOCALLEDMUSLIMSCHOLARS.html
just one example:
Ishq say paida nawa hai zindagi main zer-o-bam
Ishq say mitti ki tasweeron main soz-e-dam badam
Aey Musalman! apney dil say pooch, mullah say na pooch
Ho gaya Allah kay bandon say kyon khali Haram
another one:
Dil hai Musalman tera na mera
Tu bhi namazi, main bhi namazi
Main janta hun anjaam uss ka
Jis maarkey main Mullah ho ghazi
oh.. and another one
Andaz-e-bayan agarchey mera shokh nahin hai
Shayad kay terey dil main uter jayye meri baat
Wo mazhab-e-mardan-e-khud agah-o-Khuda mast
Ye mazhab-e-mullah-o-jamadat-o-nabatat
A general rule to the extent that it is Allama Iqbal’s view of typical mullay.
And now yo know that there is no such thing as typical mullah which fits in to description of being bad or evil. **
Iqbal was never the discussion center as I said before, it is you (or those like you) who take of his poetry as a means to bash mullahs which is a problem.**
Lol. A median means 50%. 50% of what? You’re such a dolt, symmetric curves are not symmetric because the mean is 50% or that 50% of the distribution is equal to the mean. You can make claims like 68% of the population lies within one standard deviation from the mean and 95% lie within two standard deviations… not 50% of the population is equal to the mean.
Your overconfidence never ceases to amaze me.
**Now that you mentioned about typical then let me add here,
Median (typical) does not get affected by some outlier right?
Mean does get affected.
I say, bad or fake mullahs are outliers. Not the norm.
Hence your term of using median (typical) was again incorrect, since you seem to be including good mullahs as your target of your criticism when talk about median or typical.
Ideally you should not even use statistics and just bash the bad outliers, but if you really want to then use mean as your target not median/typical.
**** The Mean vs. the Median **
As measures of central tendency, the mean and the median each have advantages and disadvantages. Some pros and cons of each measure are summarized below.
-
The median may be a better indicator of the most typical value if a set of scores has an outlier. An outlier is an extreme value that differs greatly from other values.
-
However, when the sample size is large and does not include outliers, the mean score usually provides a better measure of central tendency.
To illustrate these points, consider the following example. Suppose we examine a sample of 10 households to estimate the typical family income. Nine of the households have incomes between $20,000 and $100,000; but the tenth household has an annual income of $1,000,000,000. That tenth household is an outlier. If we choose a measure to estimate the income of a typical household, the mean will greatly over-estimate the income of a typical family (because of the outlier); while the median will not.
**http://stattrek.com/AP-Statistics-1/Central-Tendency.aspx?Tutorial=Stat
**
Thats a lie. I commented twice on the first misra. Nevertheless, if you had any grounding in Urdu you would know that it is perfectly alrite to quote misray instead of complete shairs. ‘bari dair kardi mehrbaan atay atay’ etc.
**
No you did not. Quote me where you really made comment on the whole misra?** **The comment you made on it was wrong and incomplete. **