DiscussMormonism.com

https://www.mormoninterpreter.com/josep ... -the-maya/

We have now been shown that Bayes Theorem demonstrates so many positive correlations to the Book of Mormon peoples and the Mayans, that the Book of Mormon is real history. Checkmate critics!!! Peterson wins. Mesoamerican scholars such as Michael Coe have inadvertantly demonstrated that the Book of Mormon is real ancient history. Science wins for the Book of Mormon. Read all about it right here! Oh......be forewarned.......this lil baby is one of the looooooooooooongest articles Interpreter has ever put out there. So the information must be true, but of course.

Sic ‘em, Lemmie.

Res Ipsa wrote:Sic ‘'em, Lemmie.

EXACTLY who I posted this for!.........come on Lemmie........

Aw, it’s a Saturday. (And a beautiful one in the Pacific NorthHeaven). Lemmie gets a day off.

Res Ipsa wrote:Aw, it’s a Saturday. (And a beautiful one in the Pacific NorthHeaven). Lemmie gets a day off.

Lemmie is so sharp with this kind of stuff. One suspicion I have, a real suspicion, is that Coe's information is definitely being miscontexted. It HAS to be in order for the Bayes stuff to work so well for the Book of Mormon in this article by apologist Mormons. It will be interesting to see what Lemie comes up with.

Philo Sofee wrote:

Res Ipsa wrote:Aw, it’s a Saturday. (And a beautiful one in the Pacific NorthHeaven). Lemmie gets a day off.

Lemmie is so sharp with this kind of stuff. One suspicion I have, a real suspicion, is that Coe's information is definitely being miscontexted. It HAS to be in order for the Bayes stuff to work so well for the Book of Mormon in this article by apologist Mormons. It will be interesting to see what Lemie comes up with.

Agreed. I could try to hack through it, but she’d have to clean up my mess...

philo wrote:

Res Ipsa wrote:
Sic ‘'em, Lemmie.

EXACTLY who I posted this for!.........come on Lemmie........

I had the Interpreter site open before I even got to your second post.

Res Ipsa wrote:Aw, it’s a Saturday. (And a beautiful one in the Pacific NorthHeaven). Lemmie gets a day off.

Here too! And we just returned from a lovely hike, but the Warriors-Rockets game starts in 15 minutes, and I made guacamole. I am TORN.

Philo Sofee wrote:

Res Ipsa wrote:Aw, it’s a Saturday. (And a beautiful one in the Pacific NorthHeaven). Lemmie gets a day off.

Lemmie is so sharp with this kind of stuff. One suspicion I have, a real suspicion, is that Coe's information is definitely being miscontexted. It HAS to be in order for the Bayes stuff to work so well for the Book of Mormon in this article by apologist Mormons. It will be interesting to see what Lemie comes up with.

RI wrote:Agreed. I could try to hack through it, but she’d have to clean up my mess...

You guys are too kind! I'm looking forward to taking a look, but it might have to share the time tonight with my basketball stats hobby and my guacamole consumption.

Philo Sofee wrote: Checkmate critics!!! Peterson wins.

By Daniel's own admission he cannot approve of any Bayesian arguments on principle alone.

I couldn't resist. First point:

The plural of anecdote is not data, and when those anecdotes are parallelisms and coincidences, they are not even anecdotal.

Second point, just based on the single paragraph abstract:

A control group is a group where certain behaviors are held constant, in comparison to the experimental group. Two other fictional books being compared to a non-fiction book do not constitute a "control group" when used in comparison with an "experimental group" composed of another fictional book, being compared to the same non-fiction book. Those are BOTH experimental groups. It is a meaningless set-up.

Now back to basketball.