Eightcrackers
Well-known member
Do you think that an event can happen with probability three?
If so, nobody on this forum should ever engage with you again.
Matematica, WolframAlpha, and the new Intelligent Design
- Thread starter MrIntelligentDesign
- Start date
If so, nobody on this forum should ever engage with you again.
MrIntelligentDesign
Active member
You are endorsing intellectual, educational and academic laziness in science, thus, you are making humans stupid when you post and write this:
A person of average intelligence will recognize that talking about numerical limits for something that cannot be quantified is gibberish.
I am not lazy like you, thus I discovered it. It was very difficult, that was for sure, but that is not impossible.
You are really dragging science to laziness and to ignorance.
Gus Bovona
Well-known member
Agreed
Temujin
Well-known member
He won't answer you.
Nor will he stop posting.
At some point, the mods will realize the real reason why no-one will publish his papers, which is that anyone who does so, will instantly lose all credibility and authority on any subject. And quite rightly so.
MrIntelligentDesign
Active member
What event are you talking about?
There are many events inside the universe, even in human interactions, there are trillions and trillions of events!
Once again, I am not denying that there is no Natural Probability. In fact, I am supporter and endorser of Natural Probability, with a maximum limit of 1. Whoever invented that maximum limit of 1 is a genius. When we compare natural event, with natural result, we use the Natural Probability. I got it.
But how will you make a Probability Calculation for an intelligent or intentional event?
For example, two educated engineers would like to build bicycles. How will you tell or know the level of their efficiency or intelligence when they build the same type/kind of bicycle? What is the probability that Engineer A is more intelligent or more efficient than Engineer B?
Can you still use the Natural Probability, when you are asking or measuring for Intelligence Probability?
Iktomi
Active member
TeabagSalad
Well-known member
No, because a probability greater than one makes no sense!
MrIntelligentDesign
Active member
Of course, since Natural Probability is 1! But Intelligence Probability is not 1! Oh my.. Am I talking to a Kindergarten?
Temujin
Well-known member
You are talking from a kindergarten. And regressing. So far you have established that you know nothing about evolution, biology, physics, psychology or mathematics. You don't know how to explain Ideas, how to test them or how to challenge the ideas of others. You don't know how to take constructive criticism or feedback. You do know how to make juvenile insults, but that's the only thing we have seen you do with any facility.
TeabagSalad
Well-known member
No you're not talking to a kinder garden, you're talking to adults who actually understand probability.
The idea of a probability greater than one is laughable - it demonstrates that you don't understand the first thing about mathematics.
MrIntelligentDesign
Active member
If I did not do my homeworks, I will never discover the topic of intelligence. That is why, I am challenging you, in every aspect of science that I think I am better than you, than others. You see that I revealed my real identity, my face in YouTube, my real name in my science books? Because I am not only serious but I am right!
You, on the other hand, you are hiding in a pen-name or log-in-name, since you are afraid of criticisms for your errors. Reveal your real identity and let us fight intellectually, and see who is who. SHAME ON you or me, if you or me is wrong in science. You see how serious I am in science?
I do not care about all my critics since they have no clue on the topic of intelligence. Defeat me intellectually, scientifically and academically on this topic, and you will defeat me all.
REMEMBER THIS: I am the best critic in science for I knew the topic well and I can support them.
MrIntelligentDesign
Active member
That is why, you are just like the cavemen, who did not want mathematics to advance. That is one of worst impacts of following bad theory of Evolution, dragging both science and mathematics to CAVEMEN'S time! Oh my...
Temujin
Well-known member
Being a shameless exhibitionist is not a valid scientific qualification. You have shown no aptitude for any STEM discipline at all. I have serious doubts about your capacity as an engineer, since you seem not to understand mathematics. Or physics. We are not talking about me, but you. I have not claimed to overturn the currently accepted and very successful, well-evidenced pre-eminent theories in both biology and physics via a YouTube video and a rejected paper. That would be you. You are making extraordinarily strong claims, the basis of which is extraordinarily weak.
TeabagSalad
Well-known member
It's not about the advancement of mathematics, it's about what makes sense. Let me try and explain it to you.
Let's consider a fair coin, when tossed it will either land on heads or tails. Let us say that we toss the coin 100 times, 49 times it lands with heads showing, and 51 times it lands on tails.
To calculate the probabilities we need to divide the number of results by the total number of events:
Probability of landing on heads = 49/100 = 0.49
Probability of landing on tails = 51/100 = 0.51
In order to create a probability greater than one the number of results would need to be greater than the number of events. You can't get more results than events so a probability greater than one is impossible.
Do you understand? Or is this basic level of maths too hard for you?
Eightcrackers
Well-known member
The OP seems to think that he has invented a "new kind" of probability.
There is no point carrying on; I have him in Ignore.
TeabagSalad
Well-known member
Yeah, I know. He's been popping up on these forums every once in a while over the last couple of decades. He's actually quite amusing - I only really come here these days to take the mickey out of a few long term idiot posters.
MrIntelligentDesign
Active member
You must be very happy since Mathematics has a new branch and it is called the Intelligence Probability, but, you are just like a cavemen who do not want science and math to progress! Lol!
TeabagSalad
Well-known member
You failed to address my post, is that because it is too hard for you to understand?
MrIntelligentDesign
Active member
Do you mean the universe has only one event, and that is the tossing of coins only, showing Head and Tails? That is why the Natural Probability is correct because you are applying it in just one event only, and there are no other events? Is that what you are trying to tell me?
Temujin
Well-known member
No, he is trying to simplify matters for you. "Natural"probability can calculate more complex situations as well, such as with two events, the probability of either or, neither or both coins being heads. The total probabilities for every eventuality still add up to one however, since the probability of each occurrence is just a percentage of times it will happen. It cannot happen more often than the opportunities afforded. Nothing happens 150% of the time.