The author was expressing apparently advanced philosophy that is missing from normal discourse, so I can understand why it goes over most peoples' heads. "Inst

The author was expressing apparently advanced philosophy that is missing from normal discourse, so I can understand why it goes over most peoples' heads. "Instead, epistemically uncertain events are ignored a priori and then FiveThirtyEight assumes wild fluctuations in a prediction from unforeseen events are a normal part of forecasting. Which should lead us to ask ‘If the model is ignoring some of the most consequential uncertainties, are we really getting a reliable probability?’" We don't know what we don't know. Any probabilistic model is constructed with a snapshot of the perceived variables. If the model-maker is not able to conceive of variables, then they will not be in the model, which could have asymmetric effects on accuracy of the model.