what do you think the odds are of abduction in this case?

[Mr Gray]

Whereas I would call that a basic fail.  Your post makes that crystal clear.

you would call it a fail because you are wrong and cant bear to admit it..is what I would say...
perhaps you could expalin the fault in the post

[Miss Taken Identity]

I'll be as specific as you like. He had the knowledge and two e-fits in his possession of one man seen carrying a child, a few hundred yards from the apartment his daughter had been abducted from,matching her description and never decided to publish those details to the public during the YEARS he was conducting his own private investigation and public awareness campaign. He could hardly make the public aware if he was withholding this information, could he? 

I'm still waiting on an innocent explanation for this delay?

15 pages about statistics?   


So about the dogs...

[ShiningInLuz]

you would call it a fail because you are wrong and cant bear to admit it..is what I would say...
perhaps you could expalin the fault in the post

You got it wrong?

[Miss Taken Identity]

False alerts are 200/1 according to the dog handler's report! Those are part of the incalculable odds.

  No no more about the dogs p l e a s e    no more.

[Mr Gray]

You got it wrong?

An empty false claim when you cannot offer any explanation.

Don't say you have because you havent

[Mr Gray]

False alerts are 200/1 according to the dog handler's report! Those are part of the incalculable odds.

He never said that... 200 to 1 referred to false, alerts to foodstuff

[Mr Gray]

Cite for where he said the dog had EVER alerted falsely? I can give you one for him saying it had 'NOT'.

He doesn't know if the dog has ever alerted falsely... No one does... It's impossible to prove... He simply doesn't know

[ShiningInLuz]

An empty false claim when you cannot offer any explanation.

Don't say you have because you havent

49 factorial.  WRONG!

49 - 6 factorial.  WRONG!

[Mr Gray]

49 factorial.  WRONG!

49 - 6 factorial.  WRONG!

Doesn't have to add up to 100 ..WRONG
Hitch hikers guide to the universe ...wrong
Dogs sense of smell... Wrong

[Vertigo Swirl]

Well do you agree that the sum of all the probabilities of the possible events (expressed as a percentage) must add up to 100%. 

Could you quote the bit in concern?

SIL has just said Davel is WRONG but not told us why.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I think there is a way to progress the Smithman sighting.

Should I give up this aspiration and simply leave MBM to her fate?'

A Non-sequitur, answering a question I did not ask and and which was directed at another. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

No.

Go to the moderators thread, and read where I explained why stats don't need to add up to 100%.

Scientists use stats to understand when they they know they don't know enough.

Rigidly defined areas of doubts and uncertainty.

Rob, do us a favour, go to the moderators thread and read SILs explanation and then tell us why the three possibilities don’t need to add up to a 100%.  Ta.

[ShiningInLuz]

Rob, do us a favour, go to the moderators thread and read SILs explanation and then tell us why the three possibilities don’t need to add up to a 100%.  Ta.

If you don't understand basic science or basic statistics, is it Rob's job to explain these to you?

Thanks!

 

[Mr Gray]

If you don't understand basic science or basic statistics, is it Rob's job to explain these to you?

Thanks!

 

Robs already explained he thinks I'm right and you are wrong

 
I tend to agree with Davel on this one: "This is statistics and when working out the probability of an event the sum off all possible events have to add up to 100%".

[ShiningInLuz]

Robs already explained he thinks I'm right and you are wrong

 
I tend to agree with Davel on this one: "This is statistics and when working out the probability of an event the sum off all possible events have to add up to 100%".

What he actually explained was that you got it wrong, not just once but twice.