4 ms·
No photographic evidence. No corresponding accounts. No raw data. Bonilla published his account of this event in a French journal called L'Astronomie in 1
by temphn 14y ago
No photographic evidence. No corresponding accounts. No raw data.
Bonilla published his account of this event in a French
journal called L'Astronomie in 1886. Unable to account for
the phenomenon, the editor of the journal suggested,
rather incredulously, that it must have been caused by
birds, insects or dust passing front of the Bonilla's
telescope.
As the saying goes: when you hear hoof-steps, think horses, not zebras.
- mistercow 14y agoYeah the prior probability of "fragmenting comet within 8000 km of Earth" seems kind of a lot lower than that of "dust in front of the telescope".
- quarterto 14y agohttp://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Improbable_things_happen http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Improbable_things_happen
- mistercow 14y agoThat's a silly argument. Yes, improbable things happen, but our beliefs should be informed by whatever hypothesis is assigned the highest probability. The difficulty that a hypothesis with very low prior probability (like this one) has is that in order for it to reach a level of probability necessary to compete with the more mundane explanations like dust or birds, it is going to have to be backed by very strong evidence. This is the Bayesian expression of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". The hypothesis needs to make some predictions that are exceptionally unlikely given those mundane hypotheses. Unfortunately, it's difficult to see what predictions those might be. The authors of the paper don't give any, and their primary "evidence" for the hypothesis - that nobody else saw the object - is actually more likely given the birds/dust hypothesis than the comet hypothesis. So yes, there's a tiny possibility that this could have been a comet, but if so, it's hard so imagine that it could ever be elevated to the point of a hypothesis that we should even take seriously, much less one that we should believe.
- danso 14y agoI had never heard that saying before but I fear I will use it much too often in the future
- ars 14y agoIt's from this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebra_%28medicine%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebra_%28medicine%29
- shasta 14y agoFrom the second sentence of your link: The term derives from the aphorism 'When you hear hoofbeats behind you, don't expect to see a zebra'.
- Gravityloss 14y agoThis would call for a primer in Bayesian inference. Actually, all medical practice would benefit from understanding it.
- jrs235 14y ago"Did you diagnose yourself using the internet?! All symptoms lead to Crohn's disease or cancer! It's probably just a stomach bug."
- apaprocki 14y agoThe original article has all of the exact observations as well as a diagram and photograph.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]