3 ms·

>The outcome of this one event simply doesn't imply anything about the correctness of AlotOfReading's model. How many times would you have to burn your hand on

• FreakLegion 1y ago
  Your analogy contains a category mistake, but no doubt you'll 'examine your prior mistakes so you know what not to repeat'.
  • slg 1y ago
    >Your analogy contains a category mistake Yes, that was exactly the point of my question. I was subtly accusing you of the same thing you are now overtly accusing me of doing. I was showing that we shouldn't look at everything through the lens of a probabilistic model. The authenticity of the video was not a coin flip in which the results would be random within some sort of probabilistic distribution. We were not predicting a future event. We were observing and analyzing a past event. AlotOfReading didn't just come to the wrong conclusion. Their analysis of the evidence was flawed from the start and that is why I disagreed with them in that original thread before either of us knew the truth.