Replies

And Discovery Channel seems to be backing off from rebroadcasts of the program.

Just adding this to the GGG catalog, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.

Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
Gods, Graves, Glyphs PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

The docugarbage made Discovery look bad -- especially with Ted Koppel - of all people - savaging it after its broadcast.

The statistician could not possibly give reliable odds on this one. Anyone who has glanced at the names knows that they can be read in several different ways because the script is so difficult to interpret.

Speaking of odds, to quote the Odd Couple-- when you "assume" you make an "@ss" of "u" and "me"...

Discovery channel has been showing science programs with proaganda comments inserted about "Global Warming Crisis Caused By Man" being valid.

In all of these stories of this "discovery," there is a dog that isn't barking, a dog that would have been in the cave, if this were true, and would be remarked upon by archeologists if the dog was there, because they would have understood its significance.

(The filmmakers suggest that she was Christ's wife and that they are buried with a son, Judah -- claims hotly denounced by traditional Christians.)

This is the one statement that is repeated ad infinitum, that chaps my hide.
It may be "hotly denounced" by some Christians, but mostly ignored by the vast majority.

Let's face it; Christianity has as many nut cases and the insane as any other "group"; but I feel certain that most Christians have the same attitude as I do: smiling amusement followed by --- absolutely nothing.

The same reaction resulting from reading The Flat Earth, or The Hollow Earth two "serious" and entertaining books at one time.

I wish I were a statistician (I'm not), although at one time I had to learn more than a passing familiarity with it.
Knowing how many assumptions are made, there is a quite easy relationship that holds, as to the likely reliability of the final results. Exactly the same holds true of the "Global Warming" models. The more assumptions go into the the final "results", the less likely that those results are meaningful, if the input requires "guessing", "judgement" or "let's assume".

As the extreme example, if only one critical factor (mathematically speaking) out of 1000 is absolutely wrong (value=0) the results are also totally wrong, even if the other 999 factors are correct.

I often wonder how difficult it would be to bring up to speed the 95% of Americans who are functional morons where it comes to math and science...