|
Comments |
Hi David and welcome. Your comments are much apprectiated. Leeway is something this scientific oriented mind would like to ignore, as it is subjective. I think comparison to random chance is rather useless for an individual event, I feel it would be quite usefull over the long run for a given predictor. Prediction is not an exact science, as we well know. But, if we are to begin learning about possible routes to reliable predictions, I thing we are going to have to look for subtle clues in all the noise. The way, in my opion, to do that is to look for subtle trends over time, in a
Follow Ups: ● Re: Comments - David 16:13:22 - 3/12/2001 (5984) (1) ● Comments - michael 20:34:18 - 3/12/2001 (5986) (2) ● Where did you go? - David 02:06:07 - 3/14/2001 (6005) (0) ● Re: Comments - David 22:55:29 - 3/12/2001 (5987) (1) ● Re: Comments - Roger Hunter 05:12:02 - 3/13/2001 (5989) (1) ● Re: Comments - David 07:21:46 - 3/13/2001 (5990) (1) ● Re: Comments - Roger Hunter 10:45:47 - 3/13/2001 (5991) (1) ● Re: Comments - David 14:48:37 - 3/13/2001 (5995) (1) ● Re: Comments - Roger Hunter 16:15:37 - 3/13/2001 (5996) (1) ● Re: Comments - David 18:04:07 - 3/13/2001 (5997) (1) ● Re: Comments - Roger Hunter 19:47:41 - 3/13/2001 (5998) (1) ● Re: Comments - David 23:43:42 - 3/13/2001 (6002) (1) ● Re: Comments - David 23:58:09 - 3/13/2001 (6003) (1) ● Re: Comments - Roger Hunter 16:22:19 - 3/14/2001 (6007) (1) ● Re: Comments - David 02:39:05 - 3/15/2001 (6009) (1) ● Re: Comments - Roger Hunter 05:31:38 - 3/15/2001 (6011) (1) ● Re: Comments - David 06:52:52 - 3/15/2001 (6012) (0) |
|