tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post1045481109065812630..comments2024-03-19T04:19:18.871-05:00Comments on Atheism Analyzed: Another Unsettled Science: The Case of the BrontosaurusUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274381712003139086.post-41704616723423718072015-04-08T10:54:15.135-05:002015-04-08T10:54:15.135-05:00The science is settled. The debate is over.
Until...<b>The science is settled. The debate is over.</b><br /><br />Until. . . it's not.<br /><br />Perhaps we should take this with several grains of salt. (See previous blog posts for the relevance.)<br /><br />"<b><i>The scientists then ran the data through statistical programs which grouped the dino fossils based on their various bone peculiarities. For the most part, the computer groups matched how paleontologists currently view the evolutionary tree of these dinosaurs—this convinced the team they were on the right track, says Tschopp. But it led them to a few surprises, including Brontosaurus.</i></b>"<br /><br />Perhaps these statistical programs are closely related to the statistical programs used to "establish" global climate warming, er, cooling, er CHANGE in the absence of correlating data.<br /><br />Formulation of a "theory" dependent solely or even primarily on statistical (perhaps Bayesian?) programs seem somewhat fraught with significant potential for major error, especially in areas for which historical empirical data is not only absent, but cannot be created even in theory. Perhaps the "gold standard" should be a continuous reminder that Garbage In = Garbage Out when using any and all computer programs.Robert Coblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12427520849707914818noreply@blogger.com