close
more_vert

FourWinds wrote:
Me: As are most celestial/landscape feature alignments in my mind.


You: Much more difficult to prove intentionality than above .


Me again: That's why I added the "in my mind" to the end of the sentence :-)


Actually, if there's a statistical trend towards certain things then it becomes easier to support a theory. It does not become easier to prove it, though.

I don't do the maths on this stuff any more. I used to work in statistics, but I hate the stuff these days - my software company specialised in statistical analysis, until I closed it down.

Sadly it is what is needed to see if the figures are just noisy bullshit . Just glad I don't have to bother with learning the stuff . Did you use Bayseian stats .?

tiompan wrote:
Sadly it is what is needed to see if the figures are just noisy bullshit . Just glad I don't have to bother with learning the stuff . Did you use Bayseian stats .?
We did with some stuff. We worked in Quality Control, so a lot of it was about significance of failure rates. Most stuff was done against various distribution patterns, though.

It's been 12 years since the company folded and I'm very happy to say that I can't remember much of it now :-)