Re: The Bet

On 4 Jul, 18:44, Seanpit <seanpitnos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Jul 4, 9:16 am, richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

How does one go about deciding whether the criteria are met?

If the measurements match the stated criteria. Allowing for you to
choose whatever plane of symmetry you want to use doesn't affect the
outcome.

Sean, it's not a matter of someone else chosing which plane of
symmetry to use.

Not as far as increasing the odds of your winning the bet it doesn't.
Choose whatever plane of symmetry you want. If you find one that helps
you win the bet, good for you! It is actually to your advantage that
I do not define the plane of symmetry for you.


So tell me, Sean.
If I come to you with a perfect granite cube matching all the criteria
you have set, how are we going to determine if it's a natural object
or an artifact?

By applying your criteria?

How?


It's *YOUR* methodology, and you claim to have used it to study
granite objects.

Yep, and based on my study, it my determining the plane for you
doesn't change the odds of your winning the bet. At best, if you pick
the wrong plane the odds of your winning can only be reduced.


So what methodology did *YOU* use to determine which plane to use?

So which plane of symmetry did *YOU* use when *YOU* carried out your
study?

It didn't matter in my study as far as positive predictive value is
concerned.

So are you now telling us that you used several different planes of
symmetry, and applied mathematical tests to all of them, and all in
your head?

How else would you be able to draw such a conclusion?

Those chosen that got closer to criteria with the chosen
plane had improved positive predictive value.

Which chosen plane?




Correction: axes. You need to define two axis with which you can describe
a
plane for measuring reflection symmetry.

Pick anyone you want . . . it doesn't matter.

In that case, most designed objects are likely to be reported as not
designed.

That's true. No set of criteria for detecting artifact is going to
detect all or even most truly artifactual objects. That's one of my
main points in this discussion.

One of the points which you are studiously avoiding is the fact that
you are apparently unable to provide an example of *ANY* object which
meets your criteria.

*YOU* claim to have studied "thousands" of granite objects.
Of the thousands you studied which met your criteria?

Let me explain it to you like this . . . I've observed thousands of
cows in my lifetime and I've noted that no cow that I've ever observed
has been able to jump more than 10 meters. Many cows are able to jump
1 meter, some 2 meters, a few 3 meters, and so on. But none that I've
seen has been able to jump 10 meters. I therefore hypothesize that if
I see evidence that a cow has traversed 100 meters that it wasn't
achieved by the cow jumping under its own power. And, I don't ever
have to have seen this happen in order for this hypothesis to carry
with it a great deal of positive predictive power.

Sean, that merely evades the question.
You claim to have studied a thousand objects.
How many of them met your criteria?
10?
100?
more than 100?
fewer than 10?
1?
none?

Why do you change the subject every time I ask you the question?

If no objects whatsoever meet your criteria - and I can think of no
granite objects which would - and it is trivially easy to think of
granite objects which would not be identified as artifacts using your
criterion, what does that tell us about the value of your "method"?


The same thing is true of angular symmetry with regard to the material
of granite. I've seen a lot of naturally produced granite forms. The
vast majority of them have very little angular symmetry of their
surface irregularities. Many of them do have some sort of vague
symmetry. Some have pretty good symmetry, to within 10% of
perfection. However, I've not seen one that comes to within 1% of
perfection. Therefore, I can be extremely confident in a hypothesis
that if any were to come within 0.001% of perfection it most certainly
would not be via some sort of non-deliberate natural process.

Can you give me a single example of any granite object which *DOES*
meet your criteria?


Now, I could be wrong here, but I highly doubt it - and I'll put up
$1,000 for anyone who can prove me wrong . . .

Are you starting to get the picture here?


The picture is very clear.

You cannot think of any artifact which meets your criteria, and evade
the question every time you are asked for an example.

Your "method" cannot identify as an artifact Michaelangelo's "David",
the tablets of stone bearing the ten commandments God gave to Moses,
and even if I were to produce a perfect granite cube which *met* your
criteria, I could make it *fail* your criteria by carving my initials
onto one face.

Can you please explain to us all the value of such an unproductive
method?

RF


< snip rest >

Sean Pitmanwww.DetectingDesign.com


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Bet
    ... how to select the axis for bisecting it with a plane. ... which plane one chooses as long as the criteria of reflective symmetry ... If the measurements match the stated criteria. ... that doesn't match the opposing surface point, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Bet
    ... choose whatever plane of symmetry you want to use doesn't affect the ... of determining the reference plane for measuring deviation from reflexion ... standards are used to spell out measurement methods. ... possible plane there is in the rock. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Bet
    ... choose whatever plane of symmetry you want to use doesn't affect the ... of determining the reference plane for measuring deviation from reflexion ... Object is not designed Test reports not designed ... distance measurements based on this plane of symmetry. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Bet
    ... choose whatever plane of symmetry you want to use doesn't affect the ... meter, some 2 meters, a few 3 meters, and so on. ... I see evidence that a cow has traversed 100 meters that it wasn't ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: No torque on an a-chrial body in Stokes flow?
    ... Consider an otherwise arbitrary body possessing a plane of mirror ... Form a compound object by joining the body to a long thin ... if no body or compound body possessing a symmetry plane ...
    (sci.physics)
Loading