View Single Post
  #348  
Old October 19th 18, 12:08 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Martin Brown[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 189
Default Neil DeGrasse Tyson headed down same loony road as Carl Sagan?

On 18/10/2018 20:38, Gary Harnagel wrote:
On Thursday, October 18, 2018 at 11:14:28 AM UTC-6, Martin Brown wrote:

On 18/10/2018 13:54, Gary Harnagel wrote:

Isn't it interesting that we decide what is real based upon our world
view? Perhaps we should pay more attention to Bayesian statistics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_statistics


To use Bayesian statistics on these questions is scientific but you are
then stuck with the problem of dealing with maximally uninformative
"improper" prior probability distributions that are not normalisable.

P(N, the number of deities in the universe) = 1/N


We should be based on the probability that there is one ancient civilization
that is God; i.e., N = 1.


You are a complete charlatan with no understanding of statistics
whatsoever. Your pathetic attempts at sophistry are at an end.

(the same prior applies to any scale factor)

P(x, does God exist 0=no, 1=yes) = 1/(x(1-x))


??? So P(x) = infinity if x = 0 or x = 1? How can you have probabilities
greater than unity? Even x = 0.5 gives P(x) = 4.


That is what makes un-normalisable prior probabilities so tricky. They
allow Bayes theorem to give the right answers when there is adequate
data but they are complete nonsense on their own. Their shape is all
that matters and if you compare belief in a deity in the population with
that function you will see that it is correct. It can be derived several
different ways but the most convincing is from group symmetry.

(the same prior applies to any binary question)

These are the maximally uninformative prior probability distributions in
the absence of any evidence - before you have any data. It is like
reality too. Very few people have been burned at the stake for believing
that P(God exists) = 1/2 but many people are sat at the two extremes.

Laplace first used the method to weight Saturn although he gave it the
inauspicious title of principle of insufficient reason (in French).

--
Regards,
Martin Brown


Also, an extraterrestrial civilization more advanced than ours is not
a God, they didn't create the universe.

Unsubstantiated assertion which may well be dead wrong.


But if it is wrong then monotheists are completely wrong too.


We've already dispensed with the belief that Christians and Jews are
monotheistic.

There would be many billions of these God like ETs around in your scenario.


Well no, not if their were one monolithic civilization/God.


You assume the answer to suit your purpose and then shift the goal posts
every time you are found wanting.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown