What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

Someone on FB doesn't understand independent probability

Incl. intelligent design, belief in divine creation

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#1  Postby mingthething » Aug 15, 2014 1:08 pm

Oh my farking gawd. Nobody is this dumb.
Attachments
derp moments from creationism.png
Sigh..... trying to explain how any arbitrary sequence of numbers on a dice is no more or less likely than any other sequence.
derp moments from creationism.png (457.39 KiB) Viewed 1790 times
User avatar
mingthething
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Lee
Posts: 185

Country: Singapore
Malaysia (my)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#2  Postby scott1328 » Aug 15, 2014 1:23 pm

mingthething wrote:Oh my farking gawd. Nobody is this dumb.

You must be new to FB or something.
User avatar
scott1328
 
Name: Some call me... Tim
Posts: 8703
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#3  Postby campermon » Aug 15, 2014 1:36 pm

It was bound to happen eventually.

:coffee:
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17437
Age: 51
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#4  Postby laklak » Aug 15, 2014 4:19 pm

ISWYDT
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20878
Age: 67
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#5  Postby campermon » Aug 15, 2014 5:14 pm

:mrgreen:
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17437
Age: 51
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#6  Postby Oeditor » Aug 15, 2014 6:58 pm

To be charitable, he may have problems expressing himself and really means "the odds get longer as the target sequence gets longer".
The very reason food is sealed is to keep information out. - Gary Ablett Snr.
Oeditor
 
Posts: 4581
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#7  Postby Evolving » Aug 15, 2014 7:06 pm

But then it is completely worthless as a rejoinder.
How extremely stupid not to have thought of that - T.H. Huxley
User avatar
Evolving
 
Name: Serafina Pekkala
Posts: 11993
Female

Country: Luxembourg
Luxembourg (lu)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#8  Postby Calilasseia » Aug 15, 2014 9:54 pm

Fucking hell, this is really sad, isn't it? Not least for the following reason.

The prior probability of one particular die throw yielding any chosen particular result from the set {1,2,3,4,5,6} is 1/6.

The prior probability of a second die throw yielding any other chosen particular result from the set {1,2,3,4,5,6} is also 1/6, and therefore the prior probability of any pair of chosen results from the set in question is (1/6)2.

Applying this result in the same way to subsequent die throws, yields that any sequence of numbers chosen from the set {1,2,3,4,5,6} emerging from N die throws, has a prior probability of (1/6)N.

But wait, look at the expression this individual supplies, namely:

[1-(5/6)N]

This expression is equal to:

[(6/6)N - (5/6)N] = [(6-5)N/6N] = (1/6)N.

In short, all this individual has done, is derive a different form for the same expression describing the prior probability of N independent events.

Yet this individual is apparently too thick to realise this.
Signature temporarily on hold until I can find a reliable image host ...
User avatar
Calilasseia
RS Donator
 
Posts: 22091
Age: 59
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#9  Postby igorfrankensteen » Aug 16, 2014 12:04 am

Seems to me that going overboard is going overboard. Concluding that a person's understanding of math is identical with their understanding about everything else isn't really an indication of balance, and certainly not of insight. I find that how someone treats a person who is not their equal, is an indication of their own character.

Unless this was all ABOUT the math, like this was a self-proclaimed math genius. Was it?
User avatar
igorfrankensteen
 
Name: michael e munson
Posts: 2114
Age: 67
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#10  Postby Calilasseia » Aug 16, 2014 3:40 am

igorfrankensteen wrote:Seems to me that going overboard is going overboard. Concluding that a person's understanding of math is identical with their understanding about everything else isn't really an indication of balance, and certainly not of insight. I find that how someone treats a person who is not their equal, is an indication of their own character.

Unless this was all ABOUT the math, like this was a self-proclaimed math genius. Was it?


Well what you have to remember here, is that canards about probability are a favourite with ideological stormtroopers for doctrine. Who peddle these canards as purportedly constituting fact, in order to try and sell the lie that evolutionary processes somehow cannot happen, and that therefore magic is needed, in the form of their pet magic man. One of the reasons that such probability canards are subject to the withering attention they receive, is because they're part of a larger picture of mendacious fabrication in order to sell creationist bullshit and lies.

Indeed, Dembski's entire "No Free Lunch" tripe is nothing but probability canards writ large, packaged in order to try and sell religious ideology to the gullible and uneducated.
Signature temporarily on hold until I can find a reliable image host ...
User avatar
Calilasseia
RS Donator
 
Posts: 22091
Age: 59
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#11  Postby VazScep » Aug 16, 2014 8:17 am

Calilasseia wrote:But wait, look at the expression this individual supplies, namely:

[1-(5/6)N]
I'm not sure where the poster pulled this from, but it's the probability of rolling a particular face at least once after N tries.

This expression is equal to:

[(6/6)N - (5/6)N] = [(6-5)N/6N] = (1/6)N.
:lol: No, it isn't.

In short, all this individual has done, is derive a different form for the same expression describing the prior probability of N independent events.

Yet this individual is apparently too thick to realise this.
You just fucked up elementary algebra, dude.
Here we go again. First, we discover recursion.
VazScep
 
Posts: 4590

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#12  Postby mingthething » Aug 16, 2014 8:57 am

Ah. I think there is a slight typo. the N should be outside the outermost parentheses. so [1-(5/6)] exp N would be equal to (1/6) exp N.
User avatar
mingthething
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Lee
Posts: 185

Country: Singapore
Malaysia (my)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#13  Postby VazScep » Aug 16, 2014 9:10 am

mingthething wrote:Ah. I think there is a slight typo. the N should be outside the outermost parentheses. so [1-(5/6)] exp N would be equal to (1/6) exp N.
How can you tell? The argument is nonsense regardless.

My guess is that the poster picked up 1-(5/6)^N from some distant memory or random webpage, since it's a familiar term in probability calculations involving a die (it's the probability of rolling at least one 6, say, in N rolls), but it's bunk in this particular argument.

The term (1-5/6)^N isn't likely to appear in a probability calculation at all. Someone who writes that down is even more confused.
Here we go again. First, we discover recursion.
VazScep
 
Posts: 4590

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#14  Postby Rumraket » Aug 16, 2014 12:59 pm

Heh, I once had an argument in that facebook group. I was told that I just think I'm smart because I read books. That's about when I lost interest. You can't fight that level of stupid.
Half-Life 3 - I want to believe
User avatar
Rumraket
 
Posts: 13215
Age: 40

Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#15  Postby newolder » Aug 16, 2014 1:06 pm

(1/6)N = 1/6 x 1/6 ... N times = 1/6N

unless I've made a mistake?
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7321
Age: 1
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#16  Postby mingthething » Aug 16, 2014 3:47 pm

newolder wrote:(1/6)N = 1/6 x 1/6 ... N times = 1/6N

unless I've made a mistake?


that works with a numerator of one only, obviously. Any other numerator, and you will need the brackets because on the internet, no one can see how long your division bar is.
User avatar
mingthething
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Lee
Posts: 185

Country: Singapore
Malaysia (my)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#17  Postby Calilasseia » Aug 16, 2014 7:37 pm

VazScep wrote:
Calilasseia wrote:But wait, look at the expression this individual supplies, namely:

[1-(5/6)N]
I'm not sure where the poster pulled this from, but it's the probability of rolling a particular face at least once after N tries.

This expression is equal to:

[(6/6)N - (5/6)N] = [(6-5)N/6N] = (1/6)N.
:lol: No, it isn't.

In short, all this individual has done, is derive a different form for the same expression describing the prior probability of N independent events.

Yet this individual is apparently too thick to realise this.
You just fucked up elementary algebra, dude.


Just took a look at this again ...

Doh, my mistake.

However, I've discovered, in the process of checking this, that the original expression:

(1 - (5/6)N)

instead of decreasing without limit as does (1/6)N, actually converges asymptotically to 1. Which means that the original poster of this expression fucked up even more than we thought. What should have been posted by that poster was:

(1-(5/6))N

which does indeed equal (1/6)N.
Signature temporarily on hold until I can find a reliable image host ...
User avatar
Calilasseia
RS Donator
 
Posts: 22091
Age: 59
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#18  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Aug 16, 2014 8:46 pm

mingthething wrote:Oh my farking gawd. Nobody is this dumb.

I had a similar discussion with a friend of mine a while back.
He was convinced there was a 100% chance of another planet containing life, because if the universe has infinite chances of life arising, the chance would be a 100% for life arising more than once.
Because X% chance of something times infinity = 100%.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 31088
Age: 31
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#19  Postby bert » Aug 16, 2014 9:04 pm

Promote rational thought on religion by telling other people to download this free booklet. Read it yourself and you may well learn new arguments and a new approach to debunk religion
bert
 
Posts: 517
Male

Netherlands (nl)
Print view this post

Re: What comes after bad science? Bad math, of course!

#20  Postby halucigenia » Aug 18, 2014 1:26 pm

I was there watching it unfold, like watching a train wreck... Kelly Piersall's problem was that he misunderstood what others were saying and interpreted it somehow to be that they were saying that any sequence of 6 numbers coming up was 1/6. Of course his initial assertion that the probability of any arbitrary set of six numbers coming up was not the same as the sequence 1 through 6 was wrong, but he just could not see that what others were saying was not what he got into his head that he thought they were saying. He kept on insisting that any sequence occurring was not 1/6 to which everyone else agreed but he still could not see that none of them were saying that. He ended up still insisting that “Each step involves the success of the previous step” as if dice somehow had a memory, claiming victory in his own mind still I guess. :doh:

He went on to claim that no one could prove to him that we were “designless”. I tried to explain Russel’s teapot to him after a bizarre post claiming that Russels teapot was an argument against the existence of god. He claimed to have proved design by merely claiming DNA was designed and claimed to prove that other universes do not exist by stating that he “travelled to all of them and none of them were there”. He sure is a strange, but quite entertaining one. :dopey:
User avatar
halucigenia
 
Posts: 1228

Print view this post

Next

Return to Creationism

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest