Russell
Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005
|
| Quote | | Did Dawkins give the calculations for the perfect deal? What was it? |
I told you he gave the result. I quoted it, to 27 decimal places of accuracy: 1:2,235,197,406,895,366,368,301,559,999. I showed you how I calculated it. Dawkins only reported the number (the details of the calculation were not relevant, and indeed would have been distracting to the point he was making). But, since he got the same number I did - to 27 decimal places of accuracy - I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that, yes, he actually did the calculation, rather than making a lucky guess. I believe you'll find that Spetner's number is just the reciprocal of it. (Odds against X = 1/(probability of X) ).
So, according to your view of things, if Spetner "misunderstood", he must be either incompetent or dishonest. Which is it?| Quote | | I never indicated I had read it. I gave an accurate description of what Spetner wrote. |
And, as I hope you realize by now, that wasn't good enough.
Your dissection of the flagellum discussion looks as if you have approached it with the same degree of open-mindedness with which you approached the bridge game statistics. So I'm going to take a pass, for now, on trying to correct your errors, hoping that either someone else will take a turn at it, or that I will be busy enough with more productive enterprises that your failure to understand takes its rightful place as the least of my problems.
--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.
|
