PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: [Pen-l] Jared Diamond and the New Yorker, part 2
- To: Progressive Economics <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Jared Diamond and the New Yorker, part 2
- From: Jim Devine <jdevine03@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 06:07:45 -0700
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=LW6jjSnR3TbS0Xzdw7kV8lu7sZ33zTlVgQw1ko4pBZE=; b=o59q1fEA/YW4+ekmPVqSu37TTI1KmcsLe+2uvLc/v8NnCOWVauIUJIL6BOkQSV4pSZ BZOmxHdVd63i9asI9VPIBWAlw4SW2mqsBIRI2geu+ZyNEUldsbDszk0btmZIz6tmFVhx KBXM9DpUyXkFrrs0Daa1GAIuIdCfXuRmvpSWQ=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dWQpIfqNa864OBQ3wBdZyXajZEHmlTjvMdQNhmkUx57bVyR3ZBlqO8jXcPUBCTKBvM +tLtWnL9V0AsabY+FTfdxsQJhkIJnnvpyRzRQ1FHFRJEcZpBNGRgWpu7Uh8FdwdEfpWG Z/0evIoSCsqtNQ6SchCMKcoHgGdj4RdN7y4uQ=
to test astrology's validity, I'll tell you all the details about my
life (except my birthday and related) and you tell me when I was born.
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Shane Mage <shmage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On May 9, 2009, at 12:35 AM, Sabri Oncu wrote:
>
> Shane:
>
> That astrology's theoretical structure finds no place among the theoretical
>
> structures of the "respectable" sciences in no way negates the fact
>
> that it is, in principle, scientific. Empirical testing could
>
> invalidate--or (perish the thought) confirm it.
>
> But then, there is the data issue: should it be time-series,
> cross-sectional or panel (that is, time-series/cross-sectional)?
>
> If it is time-series or panel, what should be the observation
> frequency: yearly, monthly, hourly, every other secondly or shorter or
> way longer than yearly?
>
> If it is cross-sectional or panel, how large should be the
> cross-section: five persons, 5,000 persons, 5,000,000 persons, the
> entire human population currently alive and lived in the past?
>
> How about fitting a two-dimensional Fourier Series to an infinitely
> long-infinitely broad data?
>
> The fit would be perfect, but would it explain or predict anything?
>
> Start with something much simpler. Take fifty matched pairs--one a lottery
> winner, one a victim of a fatal automobile accident. Give birth
> day/time/place and event day/time place for each to 200 professional
> astrologers (sample size=10,000). Tell them to identify which was which in
> each case. Test the percentage of correct identifications for statistical
> significance.
>
> Shane Mage
>
> This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it
>
> always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
>
> kindling in measures and going out in measures."
>
> Herakleitos of Ephesos
>
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>
>
--
Jim Devine / "If heart-aches were commercials, we'd all be on TV." -- John Prine
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
- Thread context:
- Re: [Pen-l] Idiotic thread on science, (continued)
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]