[INFJ] Crop circles: jokers idea of a fun night or something else going on underneath?

muir said:
many people have a missunderstanding of Occams razor

Many people think that it means that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one for any situation but Occams razor actually states that it is most likely the simplest explanation according to THE EVIDENCE AT HAND, which is to say that the simplest explanation must conform to the evidence or it is likely not correct

This is why it's dumb for some people to call other people 'conspiracy theorists' without first listening to all the evidence

Because when you look at all the evidence the simplest explanation really is that there is a cabal of people behind many of the worlds problems
Click to expand...

That's actually a good point.

Prime example: Monty Hall problem. The simple answer turns out to be the wrong one.
 
[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]

Another example of the simplest solution not always being the correct one is with Rubik's cubes. According to Rubik there's only one solution - match all the colors on each side. However there's actually MANY solutions which invisibly meet this criteria on a standard cube. Meaning there's multiple arrangements which have all the colors matching on one side. How is this so? The centers can be invisibly rotated! You can't see it because it is an indiscernible field of color with no reference points as to what way the piece is actually turned, but if you have a supercube or picture cube, the previously hidden orientation of centers immediately becomes obvious.

So a normal Rubik's has many hidden solutions, as opposed to a supercube which actually has only one.

Edit: or put it this way.
Lets say you have three cubes. Two standard ones, and one super. You give them all the same scramble.

You solve the first normal cube and make note of the moves you use to solve it.

If you apply the same moves you wrote down to the second normal cube, it will also always appear solved.

If you apply the same moves to the super cube, will it be solved? Not usually. There's a chance it could be but most of the time it will not be solved using the same moves, even with the same scramble.

Edit edit:
However if you do this inversely and solve the supercube first and then apply the moves to the two normal cubes, they will both be solved perfectly to the state they were before the scramble.
 
Last edited:
dogman6126 said:
what you call evidence, I call speculation. That has been well established
Click to expand...

What i established was that you didn't look at the evidence because you kept saying things that showed that you hadn't looked at it
 
muir said:
What i established was that you didn't look at the evidence because you kept saying things that showed that you hadn't looked at it
Click to expand...

Lol, what reality are you living in. That's borderline delusional. Only once did you post anything reliable in and that was because I did my own research.....actually never mind. I'm not getting into this with you here again. You never listen to reason.
 
dogman6126 said:
Lol, what reality are you living in. That's borderline delusional. Only once did you post anything reliable in and that was because I did my own research.....actually never mind. I'm not getting into this with you here again. You never listen to reason.
Click to expand...

So now you're slinging insults?

Look man there is ample evidence of the concentration of wealth not only in the US but also in the 'west'

There is also ample evidence of connections between those concentrations of wealth and the banking sector and the energy sector which in turn are also connected to the constant and unrelenting wars

These things are all connected and there is ample evidence of that
 
muir said:
So now you're slinging insults?

Look man there is ample evidence of the concentration of wealth not only in the US but also in the 'west'

There is also ample evidence of connections between those concentrations of wealth and the banking sector and the energy sector which in turn are also connected to the constant and unrelenting wars

These things are all connected and there is ample evidence of that
Click to expand...

Lol, whatever Muir.
 
sprinkles said:
That's actually a good point.

Prime example: Monty Hall problem. The simple answer turns out to be the wrong one.
Click to expand...

Its funny you mention that. I heard that just about 6 months ago for the first time. I solved it in about the first 30 minutes. I went online to tell people it was nothing more than smoke an mirrors and it was like I had told them their mother just died.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Its funny you mention that. I heard that just about 6 months ago for the first time. I solved it in about the first 30 minutes. I went online to tell people it was nothing more than smoke an mirrors and it was like I had told them their mother just died.
Click to expand...

Most people have trouble with the Monty Hall problem at first until they just get it. This has more to do with how the brain works and failure of the heuristics most people use.

Intuition gives them the wrong answer and they don't understand why, because it's counterintuitive.
 
[video=youtube;5BbkzhOBIrg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BbkzhOBIrg[/video]
 
Based on gut response, probably a bunch of attention grabbing people. Or things. Someone/thing wanted our attention. It worked. Why? Again, could be anything. I'd think that it has to do with either a distraction, or it was a ploy for money.

With the research, I think it was a cleverly done stunt. Only someone who is a very skilled liar could pull it off. Motive? Why do we need a motive?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top