Page 1 of 1
Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Sun May 12, 2019 2:44 pm
by circumspice
This study is almost sure to cause some wretched infighting & mudslinging. Almost everyone hates to have their pet theory proven wrong. Let the anthro wars begin... (or should I say resume?)
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 142452.htm
Re: Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 8:24 am
by Minimalist
"One can disagree about morphology and the different features of a fossil, but the level of confidence we can put in the mathematical and statistical analyses of the chronological data in this paper makes our argument a very strong one."
Math and stats, huh? Hmmm......
Re: Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 2:16 pm
by circumspice
Minimalist wrote:"One can disagree about morphology and the different features of a fossil, but the level of confidence we can put in the mathematical and statistical analyses of the chronological data in this paper makes our argument a very strong one."
Math and stats, huh? Hmmm......
Yeah, they've been using statistics for analysis of probability of data sets for a while now... Bayesian statistics...
Bayesian statistics is a theory in the field of statistics based on the Bayesian interpretation of probability where probability expresses a degree of belief in an event, which can change as new information is gathered, rather than a fixed value based upon frequency or propensity.
Bayesian statistics - Wikipedia
Re: Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 2:22 pm
by circumspice
I think that Wikipedia worded the definition of Bayesian statistics poorly. They probably should have used the phrase "degree of confidence" rather than "degree of belief".
Re: Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 1:37 pm
by kbs2244
Didn't we just have a discussion about this in another thread?
Re: Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 10:52 pm
by Minimalist
I found Carrier's use of Bayes Theory to be an extreme annoyance in "On The Historicity of Jesus." The problem seems to be that math works great for math but when you have to assign arbitrary values to non-math problems the who thing seems pretty pointless.,
Re: Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Thu May 16, 2019 9:56 am
by circumspice
On this study, they didn't analyze who or what. Their target data was when... The 'when' can be as telling as the 'where' when you're dealing with something as fragmentary as hominid fossils.
Re: Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Fri May 17, 2019 6:20 pm
by Minimalist
I'd be curious to know what the margin of error is though. Even 10,000 years is a really long time historically if not geologically.
Re: Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Fri May 17, 2019 7:26 pm
by circumspice
Minimalist wrote:I'd be curious to know what the margin of error is though. Even 10,000 years is a really long time historically if not geologically.
Ask cogs, he'd probably know. Or at least know where to find the answer.
Re: Booted off the family tree?
Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 4:08 pm
by Minimalist
I'm sure he'll pass by eventually.