If you go to the web page of the National Academy of Sciences, the world's premier scientific organization, and look under 'Mathematics', you'll find eight individuals who call themselves statisticians. They're all pseudoscientists, are they?
So if they are wrong, that means the data is wrong, as I just pointed out.
And unless you're expecting that everyone who is lying, it's the "statistics" that are wrong.
If I said Dave is 6 and Tom is 2 and asked you what their difference in age was, and you said 4, but it turned out that you were wrong because Tom is really 5--does that mean algebra is a false science?
Just in the same way that they try to use statistics to "prove" evolution.
Before I bother to respond to this, in In what particular manner do think "they" use statistics to prove evolution?
It's all pseudoscience.
You mean like other sciences that rely heavily on statistics, such as physical astronomy and geology?
No... it means the method of gathering the data is wrong or biased. For example, on-line polls are unreliable, because they are limited to people who are on-line and inclined to respond to such polls.
And even at its best, statistics doesn't claim to speak with certainty. It claims that its results are probably approximately correct. When the news says that 55% of people believe something, according to a poll, what it actually means that it is 95% likely that 52-58% of people believe something, if the data was collected in an unbiased manner. (And the certainty and range may be adjusted, based on the method used to analyze the data and the sample size.)