Anon sent a question about Bertrand’s Paradox. The paradox is supposed to show something has gone wrong with our thinking in probability. And it has, but not in the way its proponents […]
Bertrand’s Paradox — Solved!
How Many Digits Do You Report? A Surprising Answer
Question from Anon (with added paragraphifications): Message: Dear Dr Briggs, I am a lay man in statistics, who has tried to avoid this kind of sport as much as possible, so I […]
Was Fisher Wrong? Whether Or Not Statistical Models Are Needed
The answer is yes. Or, if you prefer, no. It depends. Here’s a long query about the subject from friend-of-the-blog Kevin Gray. Over the years many have disagreed about many things with […]
David Stove Exposes Karl Popper’s Wee P!
We have discussed before (and in detail here) how Fisher, inventor of the wee P of which scientists boast (“Look how small my P is!” shouted the excited scientist), was deeply influenced […]
More On Why Falsifiability Is Not Interesting
Take a look-see at this science pic: This is the output from some model, the nature of which is not especially interesting, and the accompanying observations. In other words, predictions and the […]
Curious Notions Of Cause In Science & Statistics
You will forgive me if this post is more technical than usual. I try to leave out math, knowing how confusing it can be. But here it is necessary. The Review I […]
There Are No Such Things As 100-Year Floods: Global Warming Isn’t Making Floods Worse
Reader Chuck Lampert writes: Hi Briggs! I got into a kerfluffle with some Climate Apocalypse true believers who said the frequency of 1/50, 1/100, 1/500, and 1/1000 yr floods is increasing because […]
When Does A Small Probability Mean Impossibility?
Question from reader Richard Stevens: A professional scientist, holding an MS in one of the hard sciences, addressed the argument that the probability of creating a protein or an enzyme by neo-Darwinian […]
Recent Comments