What are your unpopular opinions?

[E34-3.2]

E34-3.2 said:

MiniMan64 said:

The irony is strong in this post.

Have you done any googling?

Yes the soft tissue find was impressive but in no way did it fall into question the age of the dinosaur. It has raised some interesting ideas about chemical preservation but disproving evolution?

Yes, impressive and yes it question the age of dinosaurs. Does it disprove evolution? No, but it disprove Darwin's theory and how long it took for us to be humans. It doesn't mean evolution did not happen, it means it happen very differently than what we were thinking.

Ps: not sure what is the irony you are talking about?

[p1esk]

Dr Jekyll said:

The 95% of drivers who reportedly think they are above average may actually be correct. It's certainly perfectly possible that 5% of drivers are total nutters and 95% are doing their best with varying degrees of competence, in which case the mean average is between the 2 and only 5% of drivers are below average.

Justifiable or not, that makes me feel somewhat better about my driving. Thank you.

Incidentally, I get confused between "mean" and "average" - and I certainly don't know what "mean average" means; if you see what I mean.

If we have six different numbers, add them up and divide the total by six, is the result the average or the mean?

OTOH, if we have six different numbers and we add together the lowest and the highest (ignoring the other four numbers) and divide the total by two, is the result the mean or the average?

[p1esk]

techiedave said:

Front bottom said:

I believe in things beyond known science.

I'm a Dianne Abbot fan too

Is that the Labour politician who, when talking to somebody, closes her eyes? I might be quite wrong about this, but to me that says; "I know what's right, and I'm not interested in any views to the contrary that you might present."

...or have I got this quite wrong and you're referring to somebody else?

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not a fan of Dianne Abbott, the politician. However, I think Frank Field, also a labour politician, talks a good deal of sense.

[Dr Jekyll]

p1esk said:

Justifiable or not, that makes me feel somewhat better about my driving. Thank you.

Incidentally, I get confused between "mean" and "average" - and I certainly don't know what "mean average" means; if you see what I mean.

If we have six different numbers, add them up and divide the total by six, is the result the average or the mean?

It's the mean, which is one type of average.

p1esk said:

OTOH, if we have six different numbers and we add together the lowest and the highest (ignoring the other four numbers) and divide the total by two, is the result the mean or the average?

Neither, it's the mean average of the lowest and highest.

There are three types of average that I know of.

Mean average (the one normally called the average): Add them up and divide by how many there are.
Median average: The figure in the middle, EG of 1,2,3,4,5,6, 7 the median is 4, OK so is the Mean but that's not the point.
Mode average: The most common number to occur. EG The modal average number of wheels on a car is 4, the modal number of legs on a person is 2. Not a great deal of use.

[singlecoil]

E34-3.2 said:

travel is dangerous said:

If evolution is not operating, how have bacteria been able to become resistant to synthetic antibiotics which didn't exist naturally until within the last 60-70 years or so?

Evolution happened differently. That is what they proved.

Who are the 'they' you are referring to here?

awaits response along the lines of "do your own research"

[amusingduck]

p1esk said:

Justifiable or not, that makes me feel somewhat better about my driving. Thank you.

Incidentally, I get confused between "mean" and "average" - and I certainly don't know what "mean average" means; if you see what I mean.

If we have six different numbers, add them up and divide the total by six, is the result the average or the mean?

OTOH, if we have six different numbers and we add together the lowest and the highest (ignoring the other four numbers) and divide the total by two, is the result the mean or the average?

The result in your example is both. It is the mean, which is a type of average.

Your second example is called the "midrange"

Midrange
The mean of the highest and lowest values. (Max + Min) / 2

More info here - https://people.richland.edu/james/lecture/m170/ch0...

[E34-3.2]

singlecoil said:

Who are the 'they' you are referring to here?

awaits response along the lines of "do your own research"

Read books such as :
" icon of evolution" by J.Wells
"The devil's delusion" by D. Berlinski
" signature in the cell" by S.C Mayer (might be to religious for you)

Plenty more but after is more about if you are interested in the subject or not. I find it very interesting. Some good debates on YouTube as well opposing some very bright people.

[gothatway]

Dr Jekyll said:

It's certainly perfectly possible that 5% of drivers are total nutters and 95% are doing their best with varying degrees of competence, in which case the mean average is between the 2 and only 5% of drivers are below average.

It's also certainly perfectly possible that 95% of drivers are total nutters and 5% are doing their best with varying degrees of competence, in which case the mean average is between the 2 and 95% of drivers are below average.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Hey diddle diddle
The median's the middle
You add and divide for the mean
The mode is the one that appears the most
And the range is the difference between.

[Funkycoldribena]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Hey diddle diddle
The median's the middle
You add and divide for the mean
The mode is the one that appears the most
And the range is the difference between.

No,its a shop.

[E34-3.2]

singlecoil said:

Who are the 'they' you are referring to here?

awaits response along the lines of "do your own research"

Read books such as :
" icon of evolution" by J.Wells
"The devil's delusion" by D. Berlinski
" signature in the cell" by S.C Mayer (might be to religious for you)

Plenty more but after is more about if you are interested in the subject or not. I find it very interesting. Some good debates on YouTube as well opposing some very bright people.

[Front bottom]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Front bottom said:

I believe in things beyond known science.

Does this mean you believe that there are questions science can't answer? Which is quite right.

Or does it mean that you believe in a whole load of utter fking made up bks that flies in the face of what science does know, using the pathetic mantra of "Well science doesn't know everything" which is fking obvious otherwise we wouldn't still be doing it.

How predictable, I knew you wouldn't be far away.

[singlecoil]

E34-3.2 said:

singlecoil said:

Who are the 'they' you are referring to here?

awaits response along the lines of "do your own research"

Read books such as :
" icon of evolution" by J.Wells
"The devil's delusion" by D. Berlinski
" signature in the cell" by S.C Mayer (might be to religious for you)

Plenty more but after is more about if you are interested in the subject or not. I find it very interesting. Some good debates on YouTube as well opposing some very bright people.

Plenty more I daresay indeed.

Read books by those people? I really don't think so. I'm not particularly interested in Intelligent Design but do have some passing interest in the psychology of people who do believe that stuff. What is your background may I ask, do you come from a religious family?

[paulguitar]

E34-3.2 said:

singlecoil said:

Who are the 'they' you are referring to here?

awaits response along the lines of "do your own research"

Read books such as :
" icon of evolution" by J.Wells
"The devil's delusion" by D. Berlinski
" signature in the cell" by S.C Mayer (might be to religious for you)

Plenty more but after is more about if you are interested in the subject or not. I find it very interesting. Some good debates on YouTube as well opposing some very bright people.

A cursory scan of the works there has already set off some serious red flags. Belinski, for example, thanks Ann Coulter for inspiration...

[p1esk]

paulguitar said:

E34-3.2 said:

singlecoil said:

Who are the 'they' you are referring to here?

awaits response along the lines of "do your own research"

Read books such as :
" icon of evolution" by J.Wells
"The devil's delusion" by D. Berlinski
" signature in the cell" by S.C Mayer (might be to religious for you)

Plenty more but after is more about if you are interested in the subject or not. I find it very interesting. Some good debates on YouTube as well opposing some very bright people.

A cursory scan of the works there has already set off some serious red flags. Belinski, for example, thanks Ann Coulter for inspiration...

Oh, Ann Coulter - I thought that name seemed familiar. I seem to recall she has presented some 'interesting' views. She's not a very politically correct lady from what I recall; and she's all the better for that, I'd say.

[paulguitar]

p1esk said:

paulguitar said:

E34-3.2 said:

singlecoil said:

Who are the 'they' you are referring to here?

awaits response along the lines of "do your own research"

Read books such as :
" icon of evolution" by J.Wells
"The devil's delusion" by D. Berlinski
" signature in the cell" by S.C Mayer (might be to religious for you)

Plenty more but after is more about if you are interested in the subject or not. I find it very interesting. Some good debates on YouTube as well opposing some very bright people.

A cursory scan of the works there has already set off some serious red flags. Belinski, for example, thanks Ann Coulter for inspiration...

Oh, Ann Coulter - I thought that name seemed familiar. I seem to recall she has presented some 'interesting' views. She's not a very politically correct lady from what I recall; and she's all the better for that, I'd say.

She is a person so bitter and twisted that she looks like she is being physically eaten from inside. A truly horrendous character. She accused women widowed by the 911 tragedy as 'enjoying their husband's deaths', thinks America should invade other nations to 'Convert them to Christianity' and wrote 'God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'

[p1esk]

paulguitar said:

p1esk said:

paulguitar said:

E34-3.2 said:

singlecoil said:

Who are the 'they' you are referring to here?

awaits response along the lines of "do your own research"

Read books such as :
" icon of evolution" by J.Wells
"The devil's delusion" by D. Berlinski
" signature in the cell" by S.C Mayer (might be to religious for you)

Plenty more but after is more about if you are interested in the subject or not. I find it very interesting. Some good debates on YouTube as well opposing some very bright people.

A cursory scan of the works there has already set off some serious red flags. Belinski, for example, thanks Ann Coulter for inspiration...

Oh, Ann Coulter - I thought that name seemed familiar. I seem to recall she has presented some 'interesting' views. She's not a very politically correct lady from what I recall; and she's all the better for that, I'd say.

She is a person so bitter and twisted that she looks like she is being physically eaten from inside. A truly horrendous character. She accused women widowed by the 911 tragedy as 'enjoying their husband's deaths', thinks America should invade other nations to 'Convert them to Christianity' and wrote 'God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'

Oh, I've no detailed knowledge of her utterances, but I can't think she's wrong on all counts. You may think differently.

I found myself partially in agreement with some of what she seemed to believe in.

[paulguitar]

p1esk said:

paulguitar said:

p1esk said:

paulguitar said:

E34-3.2 said:

singlecoil said:

Who are the 'they' you are referring to here?

awaits response along the lines of "do your own research"

Read books such as :
" icon of evolution" by J.Wells
"The devil's delusion" by D. Berlinski
" signature in the cell" by S.C Mayer (might be to religious for you)

Plenty more but after is more about if you are interested in the subject or not. I find it very interesting. Some good debates on YouTube as well opposing some very bright people.

A cursory scan of the works there has already set off some serious red flags. Belinski, for example, thanks Ann Coulter for inspiration...

Oh, Ann Coulter - I thought that name seemed familiar. I seem to recall she has presented some 'interesting' views. She's not a very politically correct lady from what I recall; and she's all the better for that, I'd say.

She is a person so bitter and twisted that she looks like she is being physically eaten from inside. A truly horrendous character. She accused women widowed by the 911 tragedy as 'enjoying their husband's deaths', thinks America should invade other nations to 'Convert them to Christianity' and wrote 'God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'

You may think differently.

You would certainly be right there.

[Dr Jekyll]

p1esk said:

Oh, I've no detailed knowledge of her utterances, but I can't think she's wrong on all counts. You may think differently.

I found myself partially in agreement with some of what she seemed to believe in.

She's not wrong on everything,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbygriZT1Xw

but on some things, EG evolution, she is very very wrong.

[p1esk]

That's fair enough, Paul. This site wouldn't be of much interest if we all took the same view at all times.