I don't have to compare them to shit. Just like I don't have to listen to your bleating about ad hoc hypotheses. You think that croation toponyms mean that the war never happened, war crimes weren't committed, and mass graves don't exist.

Deeply motivated reasoning lead you to pursue a hypothesis that contradicts documented history, after the fact. You've been corrected at and on every point..as far as I can see, multiple times across multiple places. You've had academics explain to you, in no uncertain terms, that your thoughts weren't worth their time - and now, after all of that - have decided that everyone else is engaged in ad hoc reasoning. That reality itself must be conspiring against your truth.

(July 21, 2023 at 9:39 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I don't have to compare them to shit.  Just like I don't have to listen to your bleating about ad hoc hypotheses.  You think that croation toponyms mean that the war never happened, war crimes weren't committed, and mass graves don't exist.

Deeply motivated reasoning lead you to pursue a hypothesis that contradicts documented history, after the fact.  You've been corrected at and on every point..as far as I can see, multiple times across multiple places.  You've had academics explain to you, in no uncertain terms, that your thoughts weren't worth their time - and now, after all of that - have decided that everyone else is engaged in ad hoc reasoning.  That reality itself must be conspiring against your truth.

And all those academics who found my arguments compelling count for nothing? Even Franjo Jović agreed with me that the p-value of that k-r pattern in the Croatian river names has to be between 1/300 and 1/17, he merely commented that he thinks it is closer to 1/17. And my other professor of informatics, Anđelko Lišnjić, had no objections to the content of my arguments, he merely had suggestions of how to present them better. And so did my Algorithms and Data Structures professor Alfonzo Baumgartner, he said that my paper seems very valuable to him. And my Computer Science professor, Tomislav Rudec, had no objections either to the arguments themselves or the way I presented them, he said that my paper is "an incredible connection between historical linguistics and probability theory". And my Computer Architecture professor Ivan Aleksi said "It looks good to me.". And my communicology professor Jerko Glavaš (a Herzegovinian by nationality, unrelated to the Croatian war criminal Branimir Glavaš who has the same surname) told me "Just continue that way.". All of that counts for nothing?

(July 21, 2023 at 12:59 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(July 21, 2023 at 9:39 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I don't have to compare them to shit.  Just like I don't have to listen to your bleating about ad hoc hypotheses.  You think that croation toponyms mean that the war never happened, war crimes weren't committed, and mass graves don't exist.

Deeply motivated reasoning lead you to pursue a hypothesis that contradicts documented history, after the fact.  You've been corrected at and on every point..as far as I can see, multiple times across multiple places.  You've had academics explain to you, in no uncertain terms, that your thoughts weren't worth their time - and now, after all of that - have decided that everyone else is engaged in ad hoc reasoning.  That reality itself must be conspiring against your truth.

And all those academics who found my arguments compelling count for nothing? Even Franjo Jović agreed with me that the p-value of that k-r pattern in the Croatian river names has to be between 1/300 and 1/17, he merely commented that he thinks it is closer to 1/17. And my other professor of informatics, Anđelko Lišnjić, had no objections to the content of my arguments, he merely had suggestions of how to present them better. And so did my Algorithms and Data Structures professor Alfonzo Baumgartner, he said that my paper seems very valuable to him. And my Computer Science professor, Tomislav Rudec, had no objections either to the arguments themselves or the way I presented them, he said that my paper is "an incredible connection between historical linguistics and probability theory". And my Computer Architecture professor Ivan Aleksi said "It looks good to me.". And my communicology professor Jerko Glavaš (a Herzegovinian by nationality, unrelated to the Croatian war criminal Branimir Glavaš who has the same surname) told me "Just continue that way.". All of that counts for nothing?

Everyone who agrees with you is right and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong? Do you see the issue here?

Boru

(July 21, 2023 at 12:59 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(July 21, 2023 at 9:39 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I don't have to compare them to shit.  Just like I don't have to listen to your bleating about ad hoc hypotheses.  You think that croation toponyms mean that the war never happened, war crimes weren't committed, and mass graves don't exist.

Deeply motivated reasoning lead you to pursue a hypothesis that contradicts documented history, after the fact.  You've been corrected at and on every point..as far as I can see, multiple times across multiple places.  You've had academics explain to you, in no uncertain terms, that your thoughts weren't worth their time - and now, after all of that - have decided that everyone else is engaged in ad hoc reasoning.  That reality itself must be conspiring against your truth.

And all those academics who found my arguments compelling count for nothing? Even Franjo Jović agreed with me that the p-value of that k-r pattern in the Croatian river names has to be between 1/300 and 1/17, he merely commented that he thinks it is closer to 1/17. And my other professor of informatics, Anđelko Lišnjić, had no objections to the content of my arguments, he merely had suggestions of how to present them better. And so did my Algorithms and Data Structures professor Alfonzo Baumgartner, he said that my paper seems very valuable to him. And my Computer Science professor, Tomislav Rudec, had no objections either to the arguments themselves or the way I presented them, he said that my paper is "an incredible connection between historical linguistics and probability theory". And my Computer Architecture professor Ivan Aleksi said "It looks good to me.". And my communicology professor Jerko Glavaš (a Herzegovinian by nationality, unrelated to the Croatian war criminal Branimir Glavaš who has the same surname) told me "Just continue that way.". All of that counts for nothing?

Do these academics also agree with your theory that prisons don't exist?

Did they too just start believing in airplanes?

(July 21, 2023 at 1:06 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(July 21, 2023 at 12:59 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: And all those academics who found my arguments compelling count for nothing? Even Franjo Jović agreed with me that the p-value of that k-r pattern in the Croatian river names has to be between 1/300 and 1/17, he merely commented that he thinks it is closer to 1/17. And my other professor of informatics, Anđelko Lišnjić, had no objections to the content of my arguments, he merely had suggestions of how to present them better. And so did my Algorithms and Data Structures professor Alfonzo Baumgartner, he said that my paper seems very valuable to him. And my Computer Science professor, Tomislav Rudec, had no objections either to the arguments themselves or the way I presented them, he said that my paper is "an incredible connection between historical linguistics and probability theory". And my Computer Architecture professor Ivan Aleksi said "It looks good to me.". And my communicology professor Jerko Glavaš (a Herzegovinian by nationality, unrelated to the Croatian war criminal Branimir Glavaš who has the same surname) told me "Just continue that way.". All of that counts for nothing?

Everyone who agrees with you is right and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong? Do you see the issue here?

Boru

My point is, if my paper was Flat-Earth-level wrong, I wouldn't get half a dozen of acedemics that I know personally to agree with me. Back when I was a Flat-Earther, I could not get anybody convinced by my arguments, much less academics. My paper is definitely not Flat-Earthism of the field of the Croatian toponyms.

(July 21, 2023 at 1:09 pm)arewethereyet Wrote:

(July 21, 2023 at 12:59 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: And all those academics who found my arguments compelling count for nothing? Even Franjo Jović agreed with me that the p-value of that k-r pattern in the Croatian river names has to be between 1/300 and 1/17, he merely commented that he thinks it is closer to 1/17. And my other professor of informatics, Anđelko Lišnjić, had no objections to the content of my arguments, he merely had suggestions of how to present them better. And so did my Algorithms and Data Structures professor Alfonzo Baumgartner, he said that my paper seems very valuable to him. And my Computer Science professor, Tomislav Rudec, had no objections either to the arguments themselves or the way I presented them, he said that my paper is "an incredible connection between historical linguistics and probability theory". And my Computer Architecture professor Ivan Aleksi said "It looks good to me.". And my communicology professor Jerko Glavaš (a Herzegovinian by nationality, unrelated to the Croatian war criminal Branimir Glavaš who has the same surname) told me "Just continue that way.". All of that counts for nothing?

Do these academics also agree with your theory that prisons don't exist?

Did they too just start believing in airplanes?

I haven't talked about prisons with them.

I also haven't talked about airplanes with them either. I actually started believing in airplanes back in 2016 (when brimstoneSalad on PhilosophicalVegan explained me why my arguments against the existence of airplanes are faulty), and I have since been on airplane internationally (in 2018).

(July 21, 2023 at 1:39 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: I also haven't talked about airplanes with them either. I actually started believing in airplanes back in 2016 (when brimstoneSalad on PhilosophicalVegan explained me why my arguments against the existence of airplanes are faulty), and I have since been on airplane internationally (in 2018).

And before that, you thought that everyone who talked about having been on an airplane was.....what?

(July 21, 2023 at 8:10 am)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(July 16, 2022 at 3:22 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: The place names of croatian toponyms simply don't mean what you think they do.  Linguists have told you this.  Combatants have told you this.  If I had to guess, random motherfuckers in your life have told you this.

Except that people who disagree with me are obviously making ad-hoc hypotheses and talking contradictory things.
My informatics professor Franjo Jović told me, essentially: "I mostly agree with you, however, I don't think it's plausible that up to 1.572 bits per consonant pair of collision entropy goes to morphology ('fleksija'). I think relatively little collision entropy goes to morphology. Thus, I think the p-value of that k-r pattern in Croatian river names is a lot closer to 1/17 than to 1/300.".
The Reddit user neuralbeans told me: "Maybe the collision entropy of the nouns in the Croatian language is a lot lower than the collision entropy of all the words in the Aspell word-list for the Croatian language. Have you checked that? Toponyms are nouns, and you should be comparing them to other nouns, and not to all the words in the Aspell word-list.".
Those are contradictory things. If my paper were seriously flawed, maybe people who disagree with me would point different things that are wrong with it. But they would not be talking contradictory things. Since they are talking contradictory things, I know my paper is not actually flawed, but that people are making up ad-hoc hypotheses.

Other people pointing out potential mistakes in your methodology is not the same as making ad hoc hypotheses.

Boru

(July 21, 2023 at 1:32 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(July 21, 2023 at 1:06 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Everyone who agrees with you is right and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong? Do you see the issue here?

Boru

My point is, if my paper was Flat-Earth-level wrong, I wouldn't get half a dozen of acedemics that I know personally to agree with me. Back when I was a Flat-Earther, I could not get anybody convinced by my arguments, much less academics. My paper is definitely not Flat-Earthism of the field of the Croatian toponyms.

Do you know what "grouping" is?

(July 21, 2023 at 2:02 pm)Deesse23 Wrote:

(July 21, 2023 at 1:39 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: I also haven't talked about airplanes with them either. I actually started believing in airplanes back in 2016 (when brimstoneSalad on PhilosophicalVegan explained me why my arguments against the existence of airplanes are faulty), and I have since been on airplane internationally (in 2018).

And before that, you thought that everyone who talked about having been on an airplane was.....what?

Delusional. Like my grandmother who claimed to have been on airplane to Canada when, in reality, she couldn't leave her bed.