Active Users:969 Time:02/11/2025 10:25:37 PM
Hehe...There are a few disputing it vocally. Whether they're in their right mind, well... Shannow Send a noteboard - 29/10/2012 10:45:07 AM
To repeat my point: A perfect Bell Curve does not reflect the data from the books.


Well, no one in their right mind could possibly dispute that.


I cannot comment on their state of mind. They dogmatically try and fit the data into the Bell Curve distribution, which simply cannot apply in the way that they wish it to. The evidence refutes it.
This message last edited by Shannow on 29/10/2012 at 10:45:49 AM
Reply to message
The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 09:44:09 AM 1604 Views
Re: The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 10:21:27 AM 979 Views
That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:26:49 AM 1566 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:36:32 AM 960 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:40:27 AM 825 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:42:57 AM 807 Views
Hehe...There are a few disputing it vocally. Whether they're in their right mind, well... - 29/10/2012 10:45:07 AM 909 Views
RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:11:19 PM 901 Views
Response to a few of your poorly researched points... - 29/10/2012 02:31:17 PM 845 Views
Re: RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:37:33 PM 844 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 840 Views
there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 08:18:18 PM 857 Views
Excellent point. - 29/10/2012 08:24:37 PM 895 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 802 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 779 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 794 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 945 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 809 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 743 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 757 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 847 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 759 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 845 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 771 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 780 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 781 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 767 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1537 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 1051 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 874 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 728 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:33:59 PM 1549 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:43:19 PM 1106 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 871 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 716 Views
Re: Still doesn't explain the difference - 10/11/2012 10:21:00 PM 797 Views
Yes that totally makes sense - 30/10/2012 08:07:16 AM 893 Views
Thank you! *NM* - 30/10/2012 10:19:15 AM 414 Views
That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:01:52 PM 835 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 770 Views
Who said it would? - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM 784 Views
let's not mix up "random" and "representative" - 30/10/2012 05:28:09 PM 847 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 858 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 890 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 927 Views
I would love for you to be right, because it would solve all our problems, but 0 is the challenge... - 29/10/2012 07:56:34 PM 903 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 908 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 484 Views
Truth is, Moiraine was being overly optimistic... - 29/10/2012 08:39:17 PM 831 Views
You're pathetic... - 30/10/2012 01:20:01 AM 763 Views
The quote isn't specific - 30/10/2012 08:32:36 AM 877 Views
Its highly specific... - 30/10/2012 02:15:38 PM 719 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1380 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 817 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 829 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 780 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 956 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 889 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 882 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 801 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 1121 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 896 Views
Re: Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:54:41 PM 774 Views
We do not know if Cadsuane or any of the Forsaken are Sparkers - 30/10/2012 10:33:55 PM 913 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 1037 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 915 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 892 Views
Not true... - 30/10/2012 11:49:57 AM 876 Views
One thing - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM 862 Views
That's the problem. The BC RJ has "built" has a minimum and a maximum value - 30/10/2012 05:48:55 PM 869 Views

Reply to Message