[headers trimmed]
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, johnwc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Exactly, that is typical of skeptics deceptive arguement techniques.
> Bringing in totally irrelevant information that isn't applicable to the
> discussion. The attacks happened in New York and exactly one year
> later the NY Lotto number 911 was drawn on the 9/11/02 date. Now, that
> is a bizarre coincidence. Also, the S&P Futures closed at exactly
> 911.00 the night before. Now that's also odd. Yankees 5 to 4 in 11
> innings, (9/11). How can even the most ardent skeptic not wonder what
> the hell was going on?!? It's like we're living in a movie.
The problem is that you're finding post hoc matches in an _enormous_
pool of numbers. Why the lotto and S&P numbers instead of the
address of a house fire and the number of people showing up for a play?
And if you can excersise numerology to get "911" out of 5-4 in 11 innings,
what other juggling can you do and still call it a match?
> The odds
> of these three events occuring on the 1st anniversary of a major event
> are astronomically high.
The odds of something that seems 'special' in post hoc analysis is indeed
astronomically high.
> Since this is the case, skeptics must change
> the parameters of the debate to irrelevant topics, like IF the attacks
> happen in Europe.
So, it was paranormal in the USA, but not in Europe?
You're simply applying an arbitrary selection criterion to a vast pool of
numbers.
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
|
