Search results

i'd be suspicious if everyone agreed on an exact number it took ages to exactly measure the speed of light which is a lot easier to pin down than global warming

silicon copper aluminium https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_toxicity : "Copper is essential to human health as it is a component of many proteins." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_toxicity_in_people_on_dialysis : "About 5–10 mg of aluminium enters human body daily through...

that's an insulting assumption I don't expect scientists who work on climate change mitigation to be clueless about climate change I expect them to have read and understood key papers from climatologists (and the greenhouse effect is really not that hard to understand) you don't have to gather...

Heath Carmody has spent the past few years taking time lapses of a mountain lake, sometimes from multiple camera positions simultaneously. The mountains in the background are not much affected by refraction (they don't "move") and allow an assessment of the refraction effects. Here's a summary...

if you don't understand what a discussion is about, the polite thing would be to ask, instead of accusing the participants of showing off. It's about this claim: The core of this claim is that you can apply statistics to learn something about singular events that have never been observed...

does he define "proper"? the authors are scientists, they obviously agree mankind contributes to global warming, so they're part of the global scientific consensus. if you only allow climatologists, then you probably have to scrap all "mitigation" papers. but that'd be a pretty drastic change...

the logic problem you have is that you have not connected this observation to anything that makes it more likely for this long-range missile to hit two people on a moving tractor so you can't logically get to the conclusion you want to get to

that's not how I used 0.1% if you have ONE white raven and 999 black ravens, then the conditional probility P(bird is white | bird is raven) is exactly 0.1%. If your estimate interval for this probability includes 0.1%, you are not able to conclude that all ravens are black. then it would be...

The Rule of Three (R3) states that 3/n is an approximate 95% upper limit for the binomial parameter, when there are no events in n trials. 3/100,000 would give you 95% confidence that there are 30 or less white ravens among the non-black birds. Not enough to say there are none.

Try telling a lottery winner that they can't have won, since the chance of them winning is too small to make this believable. ;)

well, it's a 100% sample, not a tiny one but the logic is similar EXCEPT for it to work for Bayesian analysis, you need a prior on the ratio of black to non-black ravens, anx if you've never seen one, you don't have it. So all your observation of non-black things cab do is push this ratio...

if you send a missile several 100 km at a target, what are chances that it'll hit a moving agricultural tractor? the chance that this missile hit what it hit is very low no matter if it was targetted or not! I know that conspiracy theorists like to use "improbable odds" to bolster their...

It's to do with colors. Imagine a child's toy chest, the child says "all my ducks are yellow". You collect all toys that are not yellow, there's no duck among them: that proves it! And it's true even if the child owns no duck at all, as it should be.

wary, not afraid

it's not harsh, there's no value judgment in my words "neglectful drivers" seldom hit stopped cars or other obstacles, if you're afraid of that you have the wrong mental picture of what most bike accidents look like = uninformed neglectful drivers, however, fail to check the cycle track when...

please, I wrote "may be", don't treat this as "definitely is" if you are liable in that accident, you can then try to recover your costs from the (insurance of) the driver that hit you also why the sinophobia?

Uninformed bicyclists prefer separate facilities because they're afraid cars—and then get clobbered at the next intersection by a turning driver who did not see them. To drive on the road means that a) the drivers will notice you, and b) will not hit you (scratches their car, overall hassle, not...

they're both on the road surface, so they're both ok. I just wanted to show different situations. What's bad is a bike lane (would be called "bike path" in German) that's past the kerb, alongside the sidewalk. For many drivers, being up there is as if the cyclists cease to exist. And...

since this comes up again, it might be useful to make a distinction between two types of blame culpability "whose fault is it" decided in criminal proceedings typically requires intent or recklessness standard of proof: "beyond reasonable doubt" liability "who is responsible for it" decided in...

Valid ad hominem arguments occur in informal logic, where the person making the argument relies on arguments from authority such as testimony, expertise, or a selective presentation of information supporting the position they are advocating. In this case, counterarguments may be made that the...