Re: Which Twin has the Tony?
[ QUOTE ]
And therefore God exists and Jeebus will save us all.
[/ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't say that. But I think it does illustrate how incorrect it is when many people use the term "probability" in a haphazard way. In the repeatable experiment I describe above, if it were correct for the observers to say that the probability is 50% that the older twin is behind door #2 after seeing the twin with the Tony behind door #1, Then half the time the older twin would be shown to the observer behind door #2 and half the time the younger twin would be shown behind door #2. But this clearly does not happen. If the younger twin has the Tony then 100% of the time the repeating experiment will show the older twin behind door #2. If the older twin has the Tony then 0% of the time the repeating experiment will show the older twin behind door #2. Just because we don't know which it is doesn't make it 50-50.
When a nonexpert uses the "probability" term incorrectly it's understandable. But it irks me when David says things like, he estimates the probabilty that God exists to be about 1 in a Trillion - or whatever. As a recognized expert in probabilty his Misuse of the term amounts to an attempt to infuse his opinion with an authority it doesn't deserve. He can say he's 99.9999999999999999999% sure that God doesn't exist if he wants. That's fine. But delivering his opinion like it's an expert analysis of probability on the subject is just nonsense.
PairTheBoard
|