|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
![]() |
#4081 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Gun?/Probability
Wollery,
- I think that the following was your basic objection in that post: Your mistake is in thinking that, because the probability that you would be born given that all of the people you are descended from had a low probability of being born, you are somehow special. You aren't. The probability that Muriel or James would be born was exactly the same as the probability that you would be born. You're the three of clubs, Muriel would have been the nine of spades and James would have been the Jack of hearts. You're not special, you just happened to be the next card in the randomly shuffled deck. - I think that my answer to your objection is contained in the first 9 "paragraphs" of http://messiahornot.com/ACT2Scene1.php. It goes like this: Say that you find a deck of cards in the closet and decide to play some solitaire or something. You sit down at the table and turn over the first card. It's an ace of spades. You place the ace back in the deck, shuffle the cards and once again, turn over the first card. This time, it's the ace of diamonds. Hmm. So, you try the same thing again. This time, you get the ace of spades again. 'Wait a minute…' You do it one more time, and this time, you get the ace of hearts. If you’re paying attention, you’re growing suspicious about this deck you found in the closet. You’re starting to suspect that you don’t have the ordinary deck that you had assumed. But, why is that? Why are you suspicious? You’re suspicious because the probability of drawing that 'hand' is so small if the deck is a normal deck. Let’s try that again. But, this time, the first card you draw is a 3 of diamonds, the second is a Jack of spades, the third is a 9 of clubs and the fourth is a 9 of hearts. In this case, you probably are not suspicious. But, of course you realize that the prrobability of drawing that hand, given a normal deck, is just as small as the probability of drawing that previous hand… So, what’s the problem here? Why are you not suspicious of this deck, when you were suspicious of the first one? It turns out that there are two factors causing you to be suspicious of that first deck -- and one is missing in regard to the second deck. There is nothing about the second hand that sets it apart in such a way as to suggest another plausible hypothesis… If there were, you’d be suspicious of that second deck as well. It’s as simple as that… - Doesn't that answer your objection? --- Jabba |
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4082 |
Heretic Pharaoh
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 29,674
|
Card Sharping/Six Guns?/Poor Billythekiddety
|
__________________
![]() Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4083 |
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,775
|
Not even close.
Why are you suspicious of the second deck of cards? My point is that there's no reason to think that the second deck is in any way special, or shuffled in any particular order. In fact, even if you get four aces it could still be down to random chance. Why is random chance not a perfectly good explanation for either deck? In particular, why isn't random chance a perfectly good explanation for the second deck? What's special about the second deck? |
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4084 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Gun?/Probability
Humots,
- I gotta say, this is why I "love" probability -- it provides such great mental challenges. But then, I gotta admit that sometimes I'm not up to the particular challenge... - Anyway, take a look at http://messiahornot.com/Act2Scene2.php. - I do use Bayesian statistics in my argument for immortality, but I'm still hoping -- and, to a large extent, thinking -- that the Bayes Theorem doesn't really apply to my cards example. The cards example doesn't have any "background knowledge" to worry about. - I'll be back. --- Jabba |
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4085 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Gun?/Probability
|
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4086 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,331
|
I think it's charming how Jabba manages to combine an attempt to up the traffic to his website with a discussion about his understanding of probability.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4087 |
Schrödinger's cat
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,233
|
The probability of drawing four aces in a row out of an ordinary pack of cards is exactly the same as the probability of drawing any other 4 cards out of an ordinary pack of cards.
Likewise the probability of the lottery machine spitting out 1,2,3,4,5 and 6 is exactly the same as the probability of it spitting out any other combination of balls. We may attach significance to what happens to be written on particular cards or balls, to the laws of probability they are all just cards and balls with marks on them. And no, I have no idea what any of this has to do with the Turin Shroud either. |
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4088 |
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,775
|
|
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4089 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Guns?
- I also gotta admit that I'm running into a problematic aspect of my different opinions -- but then, it's our long-winded debate that has made me recognize this troubling aspect...
- I'm finding that whereas I've read a particular claim from several different authors, often they are referring to the same research paper, and there's no link to the research paper. - Sometimes, it's even worse, in that all these authors are referring to the same paper, which in turn was referring to one research paper -- for which, again, there is no link. - So far, that's what I'm finding about the serum clot retraction rings... I'm still looking and will buy that one research paper if I have to, and can. - Maybe, one of you has access to Miller and Pellicori, J. Biol. Photgr. Asssoc., 49,71 (1981)? --- Jabba |
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4090 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Gun?/Probability
|
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4091 |
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,775
|
But you're not drawing aces.
I asked why you are suspicious of the second deck, because I've already explained the category error you made with the example of drawing all aces. In fact your entire hypothetical is flawed because it's perfectly possible to do the experiment you suggest (i.e. drawing one card at a time, replacing it, shuffling the deck, and drawing another card) and get nothing but aces by pure chance from a normal deck of cards. It's incredibly unlikely, but absolutely possible. |
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4092 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,605
|
|
__________________
My kids still love me. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4093 |
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,775
|
Well, I've tried my best to find the paper, but it isn't available through the University accounts that I have access to. It was published in the Journal of the Biological Photographic Association, which is now known as the Journal of Biocommunication.
Their website has this to say;
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4094 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 355
|
In fact, I do agree that:
And as for Bayes' Theorem does most definitely apply to your card example, whatever you hope or think. I don't know what you mean by the card example not having any "background knowledge". As for your argument on immortality, your argument is pure numerology. All you are doing is writing out an "equation" and assigning values to get the results you want. By the way, if you are actually using Bayes' Theorem in your argument, shouldn't the initial formula for your probability be (assuming P(NR) + P(R) = 1.0) P(NR|me & k) = P(me & k|NR)P(NR) / (P(me & k|NR)P(NR) + P(me & k|R)P(R))? |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4095 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,157
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4096 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,230
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4097 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Gun?/Probability
Originally Posted by Jabba
- That was my point. There is nothing special about the second deck -- but there is about the first deck. Why there is something special about the first deck is a little hard to explain, but if you kept drawing aces, at some point you'd get suspicious. And, you'd be suspicious because you've developed a new plausable hypothesis -- this might be a deck of all aces! --- Jabba |
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4098 |
No longer the 1
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,201
|
|
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4099 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Avatar
- As far as I know, it's legal to use this picture of Jabba the Hut(?) as my avatar. Am I right?
--- Jabba |
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4100 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Gun?/Probability
|
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4101 |
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,775
|
And my point was that your analogy falls down because you aren't drawing aces.
You aren't the ace of spades, you're the 3 of clubs. What's special about drawing the 3 of clubs? Or, put another way, explain why are you the ace of spades. You've provided an analogy without explaining how it's valid. |
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4102 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Gun?/Probability
Wollery,
- OK. I think I understand your objection now. - But, before we go on, do you agree that in the card situation, you would begin to get suspicious if you kept drawing aces, but that you wouldn't begin to get suspicious if you kept drawing a "hodpoge" of cards as you began to do with the second deck? --- Jabba |
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4103 |
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 39,869
|
|
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Ezekiel 23:20 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4104 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,157
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4105 |
Non credunt, semper verificare
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4106 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 18,860
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4107 |
Schrödinger's cat
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,233
|
Most people would begin to get suspicious, but most people don't understand the laws of probability and (thanks to their pattern seeking cognitive biases) think that drawing three aces is less likely than drawing any other combination of three cards. They'd be wrong, it isn't, and they would have no good reason to be suspicious simply because those are the first cards they draw.
|
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4108 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,293
|
Jabba: Should the Shroud be carbon tested again, would there be any circumstance under which you would accept the validity of a medieval carbon dating?
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4109 |
a carbon based life-form
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
|
How about if we just draw high card for it? Jabba gets high card the shroud is real, non-shrouders get high card it's a medieval fake.
Unfortunately for Jabba we all get to draw a card so it's bad odds but not as bad as all the labs being wrong in exactly the same way. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4110 |
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
|
|
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4111 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,331
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4112 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/What would it take?
Tim,
- A new carbon dating that follows the original protocols would be a good start. Unfortunately, if one considers some sort of radiation as possibly responsible for the image, the whole Shroud could be “contaminated” -- and then, any dating would be suspect. But in truth, a new – and “according to Hoyle” – dating that came up with the same, or approx the same, results would be a big step in the right direction (for me, the wrong direction), and take much of the wind out of my sails… - Otherwise, probably the best way to change my opinion is to start showing me that the supportive claims being made by my side are not that well evidenced. And if you’ve noticed, that has already begun to happen – the most recent admission being post #4089. - And BTW, the article to which I refer in that post should be on its way to me as we speak. --- Jabba P.S. Note that radiation is a natural phenomenon. And also, what's the possibility that what we consider "supernatural" today will be considered totally "natural" in the future? |
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4113 |
Heretic Pharaoh
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 29,674
|
|
__________________
![]() Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4114 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,790
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4115 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Gun?/Probability
Humots,
- To me, at least, this is tricky stuff. But the following is a quote from Wiki re "Bayesian probability." From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability Bayesian probability is one of the different interpretations of the concept of probability and belongs to the category of evidential probabilities. The Bayesian interpretation of probability can be seen as an extension of logic that enables reasoning with propositions whose truth or falsity is uncertain. To evaluate the probability of a hypothesis, the Bayesian probabilist specifies some prior probability, which is then updated in the light of new, relevant data.[1] The Bayesian interpretation provides a standard set of procedures and formulae to perform this calculation. Bayesian probability interprets the concept of probability as "an abstract concept, a quantity that we assign theoretically, for the purpose of representing a state of knowledge, or that we calculate from previously assigned probabilities,"[2] in contrast to interpreting it as a frequency or "propensity" of some phenomenon. - It seems to me that the underlined section refers to my card example. --- Jabba |
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4116 |
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,775
|
|
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4117 |
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 39,869
|
|
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Ezekiel 23:20 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4118 |
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 39,869
|
|
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Ezekiel 23:20 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4119 |
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,775
|
|
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4120 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,471
|
Carbon Dating/Smoking Gun?/Probability
Wollery,
- OK. - My argument is that given the scientific model, the probability of my existence at all, and my existence now, is analogous to the probability of drawing a humungus number of aces in a row from a normal deck. If that's true, my existence right now meets the first criterion for rejecting the scientific model in general -- i.e., given the scientific model, it is VERY unlikely that I would exist right now. - I'm claiming that my existence right now also meets the second criterion for rejecting the scientific model -- there are, indeed, somewhat plausible models that would do a much better job of accounting for my existence right now than does the scientific model. (In addition, their plausibility should be added together in order to compare the scientific model with the compliment to it.) And this is where Bayes Theorem becomes applicable. - The third criteria is also reached in that using the Bayes Theorem, we discover that given my existence, the probability of the scientific model being in place is WAY below 1% and the probability of something other than the scientific model being in place is WAY over 99%. - I suspect that this will promote further irritation with me over on your side, but it probably is an accurate description of what I'm trying to claim. --- Jabba |
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski "Most good ideas don't work." Jabba "Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|