XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 21:02:36 -0500, August Rode  wrote:   
      
   >On 31/01/2015 7:12 PM, mur wrote:   
   >> On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 17:06:11 -0500, August Rode  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 24/01/2015 1:45 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 08:39:31 -0500, August Rode    
   wrote:   
   >>>> .   
   >>>>> On 15/01/2015 5:06 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Sun, 11 Jan 2015 12:18:39 -0500, August Rode    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On 10/01/2015 1:11 PM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2015 13:19:47 -0500, August Rode    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>    
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>         So far it STILL appears clear that YOU lied since you   
   couldn't provide the   
   >>>>>>>> supposed quote. Even if you eventually can, I did what you whined   
   about several   
   >>>>>>>> posts ago:   
   >>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>        Ok, AFAIK you have never claimed that all crop circles   
   were of human   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> manufacture. Unless you can quote me saying you have made that   
   claim, it's now   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> your turn to acknowledge that I've never claimed you have made   
   it.   
   >>>>>>>> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯   
   >>>>>>>> but you're not the quality of person to have acknowledged it. And   
   don't forget   
   >>>>>>>> that unless you present the quote I challenged you on it will still   
   appear that   
   >>>>>>>> YOU are lying. I did say your position is suggesting it, but don't   
   recall saying   
   >>>>>>>> you actually had the balls to say it specifically even though you've   
   made it   
   >>>>>>>> clear that you believe it.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> You're *still* talking out of both sides of your mouth.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>        I'm still pointing out what you have done.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I do not *believe* that all crop circles are made by humans. Rather, it   
   >>>>>>> is a *fact* that requires absolutely no belief that all crop circles   
   >>>>>>> have *probably* been made by humans and I've walked you through the   
   math   
   >>>>>>> for that.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>        You need to explain how people practice doing it so that they   
   can go out in   
   >>>>>> fields at night in the dark and do the jobs without making mistakes   
   that they   
   >>>>>> could not correct if they made any. Try doing that.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Why do *I* need to do that?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>       To show that you're able to think realistically about it for one   
   thing, and   
   >>>> to address a very significant aspect relative to whether or not humans   
   could   
   >>>> have made all of them for another.   
   >>>   
   >>> See my analysis of the crop circle you linked to below.   
   >>>   
   >>>>> Why is this the first time you've mentioned this?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>       I've mentioned it a number of times as you're probably aware, and   
   you have   
   >>>> snipped it a number of times as you're probably equally aware.   
   >>>   
   >>> No, I'm not aware of that.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>> You *still* don't appreciate my position. I do not hold any beliefs   
   >>>>>>> about who or what made an particular crop circle. For those known to   
   >>>>>>> have been made by humans, no belief is required. For those whose   
   >>>>>>> manufacturer is unknown, I withhold belief as there is no point to   
   >>>>>>> holding a belief one way or the other. It is nevertheless a fact that   
   >>>>>>> such crop circles are *probably* of human manufacture and that doesn't   
   >>>>>>> require belief.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>        Yes it does. For example I don't believe they probably were or   
   probably were   
   >>>>>> not,   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> That's the beauty of facts... facts remain true regardless of whether   
   >>>>> you believe they're true or false. I take it that your understanding of   
   >>>>> statistics and probability are weak if not nonexistent. I can explain in   
   >>>>> more detail if it will help you.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>       You don't know how likely it is that xts would do something like   
   that   
   >>>> regardless of what you've learned about "probability". It makes you feel   
   better   
   >>>> somehow to take refuge in your own faith in the significance you like to   
   feel is   
   >>>> associated with it. But if humans couldn't have made all of those patterns   
   >>>> without making mistakes they couldn't correct under the conditions they   
   appeared   
   >>>> during and within the time frames they appeared in, then they couldn't   
   have   
   >>>> regardless of statistics or probability as you interpret them. If humans   
   could   
   >>>> not and xts did, then no doubt there are still statisics and probability   
   >>>> considerations that apply, but you're not taking them into consideration   
   and   
   >>>> don't have any way of knowing what they are.   
   >>>   
   >>> How many crop circles are definitely known to have been made by humans?   
   >>> How many are *definitely* known to have been made by extraterrestrials?   
   >>> If you didn't know whether a specific crop circle was human- or ET-made   
   >>> but had to bet one way or the other, which way would you bet? You do   
   >>> know how to calculate odds, don't you?   
   >>   
   >>      Explain how to calculate odds if xts DID make some of the circles. I'm   
   not   
   >> interested in how to do it if they were all made by humans, since there   
   aren't   
   >> any odds to calculate if they did.   
   >   
   >Did you notice that you didn't answer any of my questions?   
      
       I responded to them in a more realistic way than you had previously been   
   able to imagine, or are able to appreciate now.   
      
   >Why should I   
   >respond to your demands when you won't answer my questions?   
      
       You're not able to do what I challenged you to do, and never will be.   
      
   >Do you know how to calculate odds?   
      
       Neither of us know how to calculate them if they were not all made by   
   humans. If you'd like to pretend you are able as I challenged you to do, then   
   quit wussing around and make your attempt.   
      
   >How many crop circles are definitely known to have been made by   
   >extraterrestrials?   
      
       That doesn't have anything to do with it. If they were all made by humans,   
   calculate the odds that some were made by xts. If some of them were made by   
   xts,   
   calculate the odds that all were made by humans. You need to do BOTH of those   
   things in order to give the impression that you might possibly have some idea   
   what you think you're trying to talk about.   
      
   >>>>>> but so far you've given no reason to believe that all of them could have   
   >>>>>> been.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Are you saying that some of these crop circles have features that you   
   >>>>> think that humans could *not* have done?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>       No. I believe humans could have made every one of them given the   
   right   
   >>>> conditions and enough time. I'm saying I'm not convinced that humans   
   could have   
   >>>> made every one of them in a single night in the dark just by stomping   
   around   
   >>>> with some boards and rope. I certainly believe some of them WERE made   
   that way,   
   >>>> but that doesn't make me automatically believe that all of them were made   
   that   
   >>>> way or even could have been.   
   >>>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)