Just for Matt (Introduction)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Tuesday, November 03, 2009, 05:58 (5498 days ago) @ David Turell

But everyone else can look, and it might be good to do so.
> 
> 
> http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427311.500-probably-guilty-bad-mathematics-mean... the pre-quiz, and was forehead-slapping before the end of it... I only got 2 right, the husband murders wife question was a trick, and the other two... I just am not on my good game. At least I understood why I was wrong on 2 of them. -Though in my defense, prior to taking the quiz I became acquainted with two fine glasses of "The Famous Grouse." -I will say this: The wording involved with probability is what you need to scrutinize the most heavily. And the less we know about a system; the less accurately we can assign a probability. -What are the odds that life self-assembled from inorganic materials? No matter how you try, there is no way to assign a probability to that statement until we know more (alot more) about that kind of chemistry.-This article also reminded me of the Illinois governor that pardoned his entire death row due to 11 bad convictions.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"