it's a matter of precision. Could be kinda sorta right most of the time. I call that a guess.
-
-
Replying to @flyingfoxxx @XBONE_PR and
most likely a random guess will ultimately fail. It represents luck, not understanding.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @flyingfoxxx @XBONE_PR and
Is that why economic models work so well? Scott says in his post, get down to one or two models that actually make pred and you got me hello
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SamMobasher @flyingfoxxx and
Models predict the movement of planets in the solar system. And done.
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @XBONE_PR @SamMobasher and
That's why there is only one planetary model. See the pattern?
3 replies 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @SamMobasher and
Except there are many. And the bad ones don't disqualify the good.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @XBONE_PR @SamMobasher and
There are planetary models that don't predict where the planets will end up?
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @SamMobasher and
Sure, any number of discredited geocentric systems.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @XBONE_PR @SamMobasher and
Good example of why analogies are not part of reason.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @SamMobasher and
Why then did you equate financial models with climate models?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
As explanation, not argument. Analogies are good for that.
-
-
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @SamMobasher and
Respectfully, my analogy can't be wrong if yours is right.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @XBONE_PR @ScottAdamsSays and
Kepler's laws predicted what no previous model could: orbits of Jupiter's moons.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.