|
In Reply to: Ok, Ok, you're a nerd posted by Observer on April 29, 2005 at 22:59:52:
I realized this morning that the simple math in the my examples were way off. Well, there's a difference between talking about probability theory and actually calculating something as simple as ratios. Duh.
Two out of three predictions is a 66% correct rate. Two out of six predictions is a 33% correct rate. Berg would have needed to get something like 7 out of 10 predictions (70%) correct to have fallen into the range of statistical significance-beating the odds that his "foresight" was something more than a lucky fluke. The two predictions he may or may not have gotten correct show nothing more than a random chance odds of hitting the target.
One other thought I had about this. Statisticians are willing to allow the possibility that someone's claim of prophetic foresight may occurred when their predictions beat the odds in something like the 70% of cases being correct. Old Testament scripture on test of prophetic foresight appears to require 100% correct.
