4 ms·

This seems similar, but not identical, to the statement: If there is not a climate trend, we would expect this to happen with a .05 chance. If they meant the

• acover 10y ago
  This is the blind leading the blind. Fundamental truth: bayes theorem. P(evidence | null hypothesis) = P(null hypothesis | evidence) * P (evidence) / P (null hypothesis) The P-value test determines: P(evidence | null hypothesis) = 0.5% = there is a 0.5% chance of the observed evidence given the null hypothesis The statement "We estimate that there is a 99.5 percent chance that the observed retreat did not happen in the absence of a climate trend." translates to P(!null hypothesis | evidence) = 99.5% By Bayes theorem: P(!null hypothesis | evidence) = P(evidence | !null hypothesis) * P (!null hypothesis) / P (evidence) We know almost none of these terms. The answer is not as simple as 99.5.
  • archgoon 10y ago
    Oh I thought we were having an interesting discussion about the linguistic mapping between probability and regular English. Sorry for wasting your time. :(
    • deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]