Science
09 Jul 10
10 Jul 10
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThat is not science, unless you want do discuss the psychology surrounding why such a story would end up on CNN?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup-2010/7878270/Paul-the-psychic-octopus-correctly-predicts-Germany-defeat.html
Oops I mean Germany.
10 Jul 10
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIt seems that most of the time he picks the German team to win. The rest of the time he gets it wrong as much as he gets it right.
I am sure that the octopus is able to pick up on peoples' body language or something. This is about intelligent octupi.
Yes, it probably has a lot to do with what his keepers think and is no better at predicting the outcome than they are.
This probably doesn't take a whole lot of intelligence on his part. Most reasonably intelligent animals can pick up on their owners body language.
10 Jul 10
Another perfectly plausible explanation is that it is mere coincidence.
The mistake is to look at the octopus in isolation.
If you realize that similar 'guesses' are being made by thousands of people, psychics pets, etc, and the bets matches being reported, the chance that at least one will get most of the predictions right is actually quite high, similar to the way a lottery winner seems improbable when taken in isolation, but when seen as part of the whole can become a near certainty.
10 Jul 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadThat argument fails if you DO take the octopus in isolation and find that it's future predictions are correct to a significant degree.
Another perfectly plausible explanation is that it is mere coincidence.
The mistake is to look at the octopus in isolation.
If you realize that similar 'guesses' are being made by thousands of people, psychics pets, etc, and the bets matches being reported, the chance that at least one will get most of the predictions right is actually quite high, simil ...[text shortened]... bable when taken in isolation, but when seen as part of the whole can become a near certainty.
However I agree that you probably understand the situation correctly.
22 Jul 10
Originally posted by Diodorus SiculusI did not use Wiki ... I got my info from a higher authority ... QI
Ye olde textbooks of lore? Wikipedia? I was taking the pish
have just taken a look at Wiki and found this;
Fowler's Modern English Usage states that "the only acceptable plural in English is octopuses," and that octopi is misconceived and octopodes pedantic😀