Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Quix

Whatever. Why do you waste your time making up terms that make sense to nobody but you, and then acting as if you are making a good point?

It would be different if you used terms that actually exist, and asked your interlocutor to consider alternate meanings...but instead you’re just wasting good computer memory.


25 posted on 04/05/2009 6:14:50 PM PDT by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: dinoparty

Are you THAT ignorant about

TYPE I ERRORS VS TYPE II ERRORS?

And you expect us to think your pontifications naysaying about UFO realities have any substance whatsoever?

Try this link . . . Even Wiki has it right about

TYPE I VS TYPE II ERRORS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors


27 posted on 04/05/2009 6:23:53 PM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: dinoparty; A knight without armor; aragorn; B-Chan; BigSkyVic; BreezyDog; DollyCali; glock rocks; ..
FROM THE ABOVE WIKI LINK

In statistics, the terms Type I error (also, α error, or false positive) and type II error (β error, or a false negative) are used to describe possible errors made in a statistical decision process. In 1928, Jerzy Neyman (1894-1981) and Egon Pearson (1895-1980), both eminent statisticians, discussed the problems associated with "deciding whether or not a particular sample may be judged as likely to have been randomly drawn from a certain population" (1928/1967, p.1): and identified "two sources of error", namely:

Type I (α): reject the null-hypothesis when the null-hypothesis is true, and
Type II (β): fail to reject the null-hypothesis when the null-hypothesis is false

In 1930, they elaborated on these two sources of error, remarking that "in testing hypotheses two considerations must be kept in view, (1) we must be able to reduce the chance of rejecting a true hypothesis to as low a value as desired; (2) the test must be so devised that it will reject the hypothesis tested when it is likely to be false"[1]

In layman's language . . .

TRYING to put it in language for all the Jr High level debunkers and naysayers out there . . .

A TYPE I ERROR = SAYING SOMETHING !!!IS!!! THERE then NOTHING is there.

A TYPE II ERROR = saying NOTHING IS THERE

WHEN actually SOMETHING IS THERE!

It turns out to be the nature of REALITY that one CANNOT run too far from the risk of a TYPE I ERROR without running headlong into the virtual certainty of becoming victim of a TYPE II ERROR.

Amazingly, virtually all the naysayers ever plaguing a UFO thread seem to be either thoroughly ignorant of these facts--OR--to mindlessly pretend they don't apply to THEIR death grips on TYPE II ERROR probabilities.

All the while they pretend that

THEY

ARE THE MORE

"SCIENTIFIC"
"LOGICAL"
"RATIONAL"

ETC.

What BALDERDASH! What unmitigated hypocrisy! What cluelessness!

However, it does afford the rest of us some amusement at their lack of personal insight alongside rank willful blindness.

30 posted on 04/05/2009 6:35:54 PM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson