Statistically...what are the chances that Maddie was abducted..

[Mr Gray]

I am pointing out the inaccuracies of your statements, I know you don't like that but it needs doing. While I disagree with SiLs 42% the need for the sum of any identified subset of probabilities to equal one is incorrect.

You can't just say three causes so 33.33333% probability of each, you need to identify a realistic probability of each cause which you have never done.

I have not mentioned 33%.....you have....so at least you agree that sil is wrong with her statistics...thank you

[slartibartfast]

in this instance I certainly am in a postion to correct sil...in fact alice came to exactly the same conclusion as me as you have just done...all possible outcomes must add up to unity

SiL says all possible causes have not been identified. I think (SiL correct me if I am wrong) she is working on the principle that a cause is a fully identified sequence of events leading to Madeleine's disappearance.

[slartibartfast]

I have not mentioned 33%.....you have....so at least you agree that sil is wrong with her statistics...thank you

Very telling, I say I disagree, you say wrong.

[Mr Gray]

SiL says all possible causes have not been identified. I think (SiL correct me if I am wrong) she is working on the principle that a cause is a fully identified sequence of events leading to Madeleine's disappearance.

Then if that is the case she cannot calculate any probabilities....as I have previously explained...

[Mr Gray]

Very telling, I say I disagree, you say wrong.

very telling ....we agree on that too

[slartibartfast]

very telling ....we agree on that too

So when are you producing your calculated probabilities for each scenario?

[Mr Gray]

So when are you producing your calculated probabilities for each scenario?

later today

[slartibartfast]

later today

Jolly good.

[Mr Gray]

Jolly good.

you wont be disappointed

[ShiningInLuz]

Where have I asserted that on this thread? Please try to keep on topic.

You asked about the price of fish and statistics.  I was polite enough to answer.

You asserted that probability determines the outcome of a hypothetical case.  I know it doesn't.  A big chunk of studying stats is about showing applying probabilities to a single outcome is nonsense.

[Mr Gray]

You asked about the price of fish and statistics.  I was polite enough to answer.

You asserted that probability determines the outcome of a hypothetical case.  I know it doesn't.  A big chunk of studying stats is about showing applying probabilities to a single outcome is nonsense.

you certainly can apply stats to single outcomes and it is done all the time. As i expalined stats doesn't tell us what will happen it tells us what is likely to happen...cant you see the diference

[ShiningInLuz]

statistics do not tell you what will happen they tell you what is likely to happen.....I think you should stop feeling you are in a position to lecture the forum on statistics


statistics are often applied in single cases ....that's how we know Leicester were likely to be relegated...that's also how we know Leicester are unlikely to win the premiership this season...although the odds will not be 5000/1 this season

I am not lecturing anyone.  I am pointing out errors in logic.  And please stop telling me what you think I should or should not do.  It is quite unnecessary.

Statistics are not applicable to single cases, as I said.  Then you take the self-same case I used to illustrate why not, and show that the result of applying statistics to a single case is fatally flawed.

Any claim, therefore, that someone guesstimates abduction is the most likely scenario, therefore it must be THE scenario, is equally fatally flawed.

[Mr Gray]

I am not lecturing anyone.  I am pointing out errors in logic.  And please stop telling me what you think I should or should not do.  It is quite unnecessary.

Statistics are not applicable to single cases, as I said.  Then you take the self-same case I used to illustrate why not, and show that the result of applying statistics to a single case is fatally flawed.

Any claim, therefore, that someone guesstimates abduction is the most likely scenario, therefore it must be THE scenario, is equally fatally flawed.

First you need to re read my post re the probability of abduction....I say it is the most probable not that it MUST be THE scenario...i also say this is teh case if the parents are not suspects...you are totally misquoting me...please stop

statistics are applicable to single cases...the mistake you are continually making is that statistics tell us what is likely to happen...not what will happen. The bookmakers calculated the odds against Leicester winning the premiership was 5000 to one ....they didn't say it was impossible.

[stephen25000]

First you need to re read my post re the probability of abduction....I say it is the most probable not that it MUST be THE scenario...i also say this is teh case if the parents are not suspects...you are totally misquoting me...please stop

statistics are applicable to single cases...the mistake you are continually making is that statistics tell us what is likely to happen...not what will happen. The bookmakers calculated the odds against Leicester winning the premiership was 5000 to one ....they didn't say it was impossible.

So davel, where are the statistical calculations you promised earlier ?

[Alfie]

You asked about the price of fish and statistics.  I was polite enough to answer.

You asserted that probability determines the outcome of a hypothetical case.  I know it doesn't.  A big chunk of studying stats is about showing applying probabilities to a single outcome is nonsense.

Could you give me a cite for that?  Thanks.