Notorious net kook and stalking freak Roberta (mop jockey) Wolfe wrote:

Michael "Biggie" Biggs wrote:

Garry Bryan <garry@soco.agilent.com> wrote in message news:<1058819589.346579@cswreg.cos.agilent.com>...

In alt.alien.visitors Xcott Craver <caj@b-r-a-i-n-h-z.com> wrote:
: Kavik Kang wrote:
:>
:> You are the one re-writing it. What it says is ""extraordinary claims
:> require extraordinary evidence", which is incorrect. Extraordinary
:> claims require the same exact type and level of evidence as any other
:> claim.

:        The property of extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary
:        evidence is a natural and direct consequence of the mathematics
:        behind Bayesian hypothesis testing.

:        You just do the math, you work out the optimal threshold
:        for deciding between a null and alternative hypothesis, and you
:        find that the threshold depends in part on the relative
:        plausibility of each claim (i.e., the estimated a priori
:        probabilities of each at the present time.)  An extraordinary
:        claim results in a higher threshold, requiring a lot more
:        data points in its favor, or data points which extraordinarily
:        favor that claim over the other.  Or both.

:        This is not an arbitrary principle some skeptics made up, but
:        a plain English restatement of a basic mathematical result in
:        hypothesis testing.  Yes, extraordinary claims require
:        extraordinary evidence.  Perhaps you can explain in further
:        detail why you have concluded the opposite?

If you claim that there are aliens and produce one, how is that any more
"extraordinary" than stating there are white bears and producing one? In fact,
if the ET evidence *is* extraordinary, such as a device the size of a cigarette
pack that produces 10 megawatts of power, it would become it's own extrordinary
claim. . .

Garry

Say what????   NEWSFLASH.......Garrrry has found an alien!!! So where
is it Garrrry??  You're making the claim that producing an alien is no
more extraordinary than producing a white bear so since we all
know(except for maybe you and you're halfwitted mates) that there are
white bears then by extension there must be aliens.   Well, where's
the alien kook???  Off cornholing a Tennessee hillbilly??  Having a
meeting with NASA at area 51??  Eating a watermelon outside Roswell by
the side of the road while trying to thumb a lift (for the last 56
years)??
The very clear mathematical answer at the top totally threw you didn't
it Garrrry???  Way over your empty little pinhead.
My 4 year old boy has more logical skills than you, fruitloop, in fact
way more.

Mike
>

:                                                         -X

Hey Mike...

What exactly *was* your "scientific and rational" intention with that "logical" portscan the other day?

Jul 19 06:40:41 www portsentry[20860]: attackalert: TCP SYN/Normal scan from hos
t: 219.140.209.245/219.140.209.245 to TCP port: 81
Jul 19 06:40:41 www portsentry[20860]: attackalert: Host 219.140.209.245 has bee
n blocked via wrappers with string: "ALL: 219.140.209.245"
Jul 19 06:40:42 www portsentry[20860]: attackalert: Host 219.140.209.245 has bee
n blocked via dropped route using command: "/sbin/ipchains -I input -s 219.140.2
09.245 -j DENY -l"
Jul 19 06:40:42 www portsentry[20860]: attackalert: External command run for hos
t: 219.140.209.245 using command: "echo "
Jul 19 06:40:42 www kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 219.140.209.245:
4413 136.142.127.141:8080 L=48 S=0x00 I=43509 F=0x4000 T=101 SYN (#1)
Jul 19 06:40:42 www kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 219.140.209.245:
4409 136.142.127.141:8888 L=48 S=0x00 I=43512 F=0x4000 T=101 SYN (#1)
Jul 19 06:40:42 www kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 219.140.209.245:
4412 136.142.127.141:3128 L=48 S=0x00 I=43514 F=0x4000 T=101 SYN (#1)
Jul 19 06:40:42 www kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 219.140.209.245:
4410 136.142.127.141:10080 L=48 S=0x00 I=43517 F=0x4000 T=101 SYN (#1)
Jul 19 06:40:42 www kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 219.140.209.245:
4411 136.142.127.141:81 L=48 S=0x00 I=43519 F=0x4000 T=101 SYN (#1)
Jul 19 06:40:44 www kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 219.140.209.245:
4407 136.142.127.141:80 L=48 S=0x00 I=43591 F=0x4000 T=101 SYN (#1)
Jul 19 06:40:44 www kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=6 219.140.209.245:
4408 136.142.127.141:8000 L=48 S=0x00 I=43593 F=0x4000 T=101 SYN (#1)

Was it fun?  Funny how a traceroute to 219.140.209.245 ends up in Milton, South Wales, Australia?

Even funnier that your nntp posting IP (203.144.32.165 for ex.) above traces to the same geographic
location.

What's the deal, k0ok?

The deal is that you are a stark, raving, paranoid, loon. Thanks for asking. HTH.

--
The Evil Michael Davis(tm)
http://mdavis19.tripod.com
http://skepticult.org Member #264-70198-536
Member #33 1/3 of The "I Have Been Killfiled By Tommy" Club

"There's a sucker born every minute" - David Hannum (often erroneously attributed to P. T. Barnum)