Because when you donate money to a charity (assuming that one does), the idea is that it will go to a CAUSE, not to the charity's marketing (which is what the study seemed to be.... the charity wishing to learn marketing demographics).
I didn't fall for it either.
I assumed he just grabbed the name "Frodo Baggins" to represent a hypothetical male, unrelated to Lord of the Rings.
I got the answer right.... just because 30 is very small and 48 is very large, both seeming to represent smaller portions of society. I figured it was the 32 just based on probability of 'average size'.
Yeah... pretty sick to think that 'charity' dollars are actually going to fund studies such as this!
I think you could have found a nicer way to make your point..... a better example.
In California autism rates have reached 1 in 88 (propaganda.... or real rate? Hard to tell. Nonetheless, it is high), and are steadily increasing all over the world.
This disorder is so prevalent now that when you speak on any issue at all, someone in your audience has probably been affected by autism.
Using traits of the disabled as some type of caricature example to espouse your unrelated opinions is not only unproductive..... but it also makes you look like a jerk.
I am absolutely NOT in support of a 'politically correct' society, but your example was in poor taste.