It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: tanka418 If we attempt to apply a statistical bell curve to the stars, in our search for intelligent life we actually find that these "natural", and technological limitation, your "bias" are limiting our selection of stars to the curve. And, yes, this method will miss some...it is however a first approximation, so that data loss is acceptable.
And, Hipparcos still contains a large number of class "M" stars, which are included in all my queries.
originally posted by: Drunkenparrot
It would seem somebody stole that gaussian curve from a French blog and relabeled it in MS paint.....
Have you now...explained all my methodological error eh?
Well, perhaps in your mind. So you came off with some "methodological"...stuff. Like that wee bit about the "control group"...that one was really rich...
Do you understand that there is no control group for this sort of thing? Seriously man, there is no way to build one. Well, perhaps IF you could get those "random dot" Hipparcos star matches, that might be a sort of start.
This implies that you understand how the aliens think and reason.
Again, only in your imagination. Although, it seems reasonable, that IF ET can travel here from his home world, that ET is a logical, sensible creature, an thus does in fact "think" much like me... But, I do understand that you may have issues fathoming the logic and reason here.
On that spacecraft "windshield"; the misinterpretation that comes with the Orexin deprived brain...ya know, not being awake, while not sleeping isn't a typical state for any of us...that and they don't want any bugs stuck in their teeth...
Oh, and I would really like you to point out arbitrary...I can find it anywhere, maybe I see something you refuse to...
originally posted by: DJW001
See what I mean? It has been proven without doubt that your so called "template" can be applied to random dots, random stars, and even cities in England. This means that it can be applied to a biased set of data and create the illusion of meaning, when in fact it is coincidence and bias.
I keep explaining that there is a control group. Remember my analogy of the left handed bald men? Your Hipparcos data are the left handed bald men. In order to see if your correlation between being left handed, bald, and criminal is valid, you need to compare the statistics to another population. If that other population has the same crime rate, the correlation is not valid, but the result of "cherry picking." The random collection of dots, stars, and English cities are the control groups here. Since your "template" fit them all, your identification of the stars in the Hipparcos data is just coincidence; the meaning you project on to it is the result of confirmation bias.
-- chemistry.about.com...
A control group in a scientific experiment is a group separated from the rest of the experiment where the independent variable being tested cannot influence the results. This isolates the independent variable's effects on the experiment and can help rule out alternate explanations of the experimental results.
How can you accept bizarre lapses of logic and consistency in the Hills' story as being the result of drugs, then turn around and assume that Betty's map was anything but a figment of her imagination?
So do it!!! You keep saying this is easy, you even say it is a virtual 100%...so...talk is cheap! Actually show us!!
It has been demonstrated that the odds of matching the template to almost any given set of points is 100%.
No, you haven't demonstrated any such thing...you have avoided such exercises preferring to use rhetoric in hopes of confusing the reader enough that he gives up trying to understand...that is criminal!
ETA: I think it is kind of cute though, how you can't assail the actual data, and have to make stuff up about the methods...lol
originally posted by: tanka418
a reply to: DJW001
Before you go...I would like to thank you for helping me to "flesh out" my theory, I'm working on new material inspired by the less objectionable bits of your BS.
originally posted by: DJW001
originally posted by: tanka418
a reply to: DJW001
Before you go...I would like to thank you for helping me to "flesh out" my theory, I'm working on new material inspired by the less objectionable bits of your BS.
You're welcome. I hope you take the criticism in a positive way and learn from your mistakes.
originally posted by: tanka418
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tanka418
Just a bunch of unidentified lines and points(?)...no way to tell what it is really...
Exactly like Betty Hill's original drawing.
Yet the points on Betty's map were successfully identified as to the specific star it is...
-- www.pas.rochester.edu...
Permutations and Combinations
Many problems in probability can be phrased in the language of "how many ways can we pick r objects out of a group of N objects." We now calculate the answer to this question.
If the order of the r objects is important, than the "number of ways to pick r objects out of a group of N objects" is called: the number of permutations of N objects taken r at a time, and denoted by the symbol NPr. What is the numerical value of NPr? For the 1st choice we can choose any one of N objects. For the 2nd choice we can choose any one of the remaining N-1 objects. For the 3rd choice we can choose any one of the remaining N-2 objects, and so on down until for the rth choice we can pick any one of the remaining N-r+1 objects. We therefore find
NPr = N x (N-1) x (N-2) x .... x (N-r+1)
originally posted by: tanka418
Just thought i'd offer this:
-- www.pas.rochester.edu...
Permutations and Combinations
Many problems in probability can be phrased in the language of "how many ways can we pick r objects out of a group of N objects." We now calculate the answer to this question.
If the order of the r objects is important, than the "number of ways to pick r objects out of a group of N objects" is called: the number of permutations of N objects taken r at a time, and denoted by the symbol NPr. What is the numerical value of NPr? For the 1st choice we can choose any one of N objects. For the 2nd choice we can choose any one of the remaining N-1 objects. For the 3rd choice we can choose any one of the remaining N-2 objects, and so on down until for the rth choice we can pick any one of the remaining N-r+1 objects. We therefore find
NPr = N x (N-1) x (N-2) x .... x (N-r+1)
It shows the way the real world probabilities are computed for exercises like this one...
Your inability to grasp this simple fact has completely destroyed your credibility. Please do not waste any more of your time, or humiliate yourself further.
As I said several pages back, I fleshed this out on page two if you had paid attention. Like Marjorie Fish, Tanka is taking it as an exploration map where the stars would be relatively close to one another and of some interest(habitable).
If you dont agree, thats fine, its a debatable point. You let it get personal.
originally posted by: DJW001
]
Was I the one who started hurling accusations of fraud and ignorance whenever someone disagreed with me? Did I ever claim my assumptions were facts? Was I the one who insinuated that my knowledge of software made me better qualified to understand astronomy?