For the benefit of Joseph

Pim van Meurs (entheta@eskimo.com)
Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:21:59 -0700

I hope that Joseph will be able to learn from the following example:

Joseph playing game of card:

I just noticed that the probability of me getting this hand of cards is 10e-13. Wow, let's see, that is much smaller than 0.95, therefor this could not have happened.

See!!! I just showed that the impossible happened...

Hmmm

Where of where did Joseph go wrong ?

If he had carefully read the Evolution reflector postings he would have known. Instead he is using ad hominems and accusations to hide his apparant lack of understanding of probability.

Joseph now claims that he is not talking about rocks or dice but proteins. Do proteins follow a different 'probability' than dice ? That is remarkable since the argument is based upon the probability of the protein's structure occuring. Nothing different from any other probability experiment. And yet Joseph somehow considers probabilities to apply differently to proteins than to dice ?

Does Joseph understand probabilities ?

All he had to say in response was:

Joseph:

<Pim, you are lying again. The issue is the geometry of proteins, not marbles, not rocks, not dice.>

Ad hominem combined with a non-answer, Joseph's 'scientific method' in action ?
I have been wondering why Joseph has been responding with ad hominems, insults, accusations and other silliness. I honestly do not understand such behavior.