3 ms·

What's your point? Nothing that you wrote makes those simulations correct. >>.. interlink with other factors to predict a pattern of coextinctions.. How do t

What's your point? Nothing that you wrote makes those simulations correct. >>.. interlink with other factors to predict a pattern of coextinctions.. How do they know these links are correct? They do not, and can not. >> By running many simulations ... So they themselves admit that they don't know which simulation is correct, or in other words, they silently admit they have no idea. So if they compute 1000 different scenarios then: a) How do they know any of those is correct? b) If you have 1k scenarios to choose from how do you know which one is correct? You cannot. >> ... over three main scenarios ... How do they know there will be only 3? Cannot know that. Nothing guarantuess that these 3 will happen, uncompultable. >> we show that there will be up to 34% more co-extinctions.. Imagine being so naive you actualy state it to a 1% accuracy lmao.

shanebellone 4y ago
Suggested reading material: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_(statistics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_(statistics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics
- oifjsidjf 4y ago
  You think you're being clever but you don't get it: it's NOT POSSIBLE to predict complex system for such long times in advance because they "explode"/diverge way too much so no amount of "validity" or "confidence intervals" help you because you do NOT KNOW HOW MUCH THEY WILL DIVERGE: and THEY WILL. You can't even predict a double pendulum after a second or two: nature is trillions of double pendulums in a chain: you must be delusional to think you can predict that!
  - shanebellone 4y ago
    Go back to Reddit.
    - oifjsidjf 4y ago
      When one can't present a counter argument, this is I guess the only reply they are left with :)

shanebellone 4y ago

Suggested reading material: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_(statistics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_(statistics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics

oifjsidjf 4y ago
You think you're being clever but you don't get it: it's NOT POSSIBLE to predict complex system for such long times in advance because they "explode"/diverge way too much so no amount of "validity" or "confidence intervals" help you because you do NOT KNOW HOW MUCH THEY WILL DIVERGE: and THEY WILL. You can't even predict a double pendulum after a second or two: nature is trillions of double pendulums in a chain: you must be delusional to think you can predict that!
- shanebellone 4y ago
  Go back to Reddit.
  - oifjsidjf 4y ago
    When one can't present a counter argument, this is I guess the only reply they are left with :)