(July 8, 2012 at 5:53 am)cato123 Wrote: Clive,
You should be embarrassed as a professional mathematician conflaitng my use of the word likely with mathematical probability. You should know more than others that the scenario I presented cannot be addressed probabalistically. I cannot and would never attempt to assign probability to either.
I am relieved to learn that you do not seriously consider the stupid proposition that you gave another AF member; namely, how can you be sure that we weren't created some short time ago with seemingly older entities and historic events only having the appearance of age. This is the bullshit I attempted to dispell.
Puipp or not-P. I'm not quite sure what you're getting at; however, I can almost smell a disengenuous use of Bayes' Theorem following.
You KNOW that the whole point of Clive's verbose contrarianism here is to be argumentative for its own sake, right? He seems to fancy himself quite the logician somehow. His approach to it, however, is like one who draws a bunch of random musical figures on a sheet of paper and tries to call it music.
