Comments for Bulletin! at http://www.randi.org/site , comment 1 to 23 out of 20 comments http://www.randi.org/site Wed, 22 May 2013 02:19:10 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-1156 The discussion on the "Long and Short Scales" page is worth reading. - huw Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:50:44 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-1104 "Millions? written by huw, December 20, 2008 Surely the "long scale" makes more sense: 1,000,000: one million 1,000,000,000,000: one billion 1,000,000,000,000,000,000: one trillion 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000: one quadrillion Where each increment implies six more digits? I realise that common English use has almost killed the long scale, so it's probably futile to defend it, I'm just pointing out that it's more logical. Huw" I have never heard of this "long scale". Can you tell me more? - Blizno Sat, 20 Dec 2008 16:54:28 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-1102 [quote]This list seems emminently reasonable: 1,000: one thousand 1,000,000: one million 1,000,000,000: one billion 1,000,000,000,000: one trillion 1,000,000,000,000,000: one quadrillion [/quote] Not to me. Surely the prefixes "bi", "tri" and "quad" imply two, three and four of something, respectively. Surely the "long scale" makes more sense: 1,000,000: one million 1,000,000,000,000: one billion 1,000,000,000,000,000,000: one trillion 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000: one quadrillion Where each increment implies six more digits? I realise that common English use has almost killed the long scale, so it's probably futile to defend it, I'm just pointing out that it's more logical. Huw - huw Sat, 20 Dec 2008 13:20:57 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-267 Well, at least you will never live to see your delusion exposed. :D - BillyJoe Mon, 24 Nov 2008 09:33:30 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-266 I for one am certainly glad we have Dr. Boylan and his mental crew keeping us safe from stray meteors. It reminds me of my own mission in life. When I was a young boy my father informed me that our male lineage was responsible for protecting America from wild elephants. He taught me how to whistle just right to keep the elephants away. Every day I whistle just like he taught me and so far it has worked perfectly... no elephants. But I'm getting old and I don't have any sons. I tried to teach my daughters but girls just can't whistle right. I'm not sure what will happen when I can no longer whistle but if there's a rash of wild elephants, I warned you. - Die Anyway Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:00:23 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-254 Blizno, By God, you are correct. I've never thought of it that way. Thanks for the insight. :) - BillyJoe Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:01:06 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-244 "Yes, but was it a near miss or a near hit?" It was a miss and it was near, therefore it was a near miss. That phrase in no way implies that it was "nearly a miss". The term "near miss" is correct and valid. "Near hit" is meaningless. "It" is either a hit or it is not a hit. If it is "near", it is not a hit, it is a miss. "Nearly a hit" means the same thing as "a near miss". - Blizno Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:32:05 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-231 Next Boylan will be claiming he sent the asteroid to Canada: http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=10792362 - AMFCook Sun, 23 Nov 2008 04:55:41 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-224 [quote]Soon we WILL suffer a near miss (meaning we WILL GET HIT!) [/quote]Well, it could be in a few years, or a few thousand years from now. - BillyJoe Sat, 22 Nov 2008 19:46:41 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-222 We Americans can come up with all sorts of confusing expressions (we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway). Is 7 million miles or even 7 billion miles a "near miss" or a "near hit?" When would it be "near" anyway? The point should be -- as Phil so aptly puts it in "Death from the Skies" -- there are enough real threats to our continued existence due to the millions of untracked and undiscovered asteroids and comets that pose all too real dangers to Earth. We have only a handful of astronomers searching for these objects and even less scientists working to come up with a means to stave off such a collision. We know what happened 65 million years ago, and what is essentially certain to happen any day now. So we must sound the alarm. Soon we WILL suffer a near miss (meaning we WILL GET HIT!) - feldesq Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:08:30 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-216 ...ed up the language. (Don't know why that didn't print) (Now it's telling me the comment is too short) - BillyJoe Sat, 22 Nov 2008 11:33:58 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-215 [quote]The Brits have inflicted enough damage on measurement systems[/quote] I agree. This list seems emminently reasonable: 1,000: one thousand 1,000,000: one million 1,000,000,000: one billion 1,000,000,000,000: one trillion 1,000,000,000,000,000: one quadrillion However, do not rest on your laurels. You American's have completely #v - BillyJoe Sat, 22 Nov 2008 11:32:00 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-214 Big Mutha. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_2aX-784sw - Realitysage Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:39:21 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-213 The Brits have inflicted enough damage on measurement systems (feet, inches, etc). If they persist with the "milliard", that's sufficient cause to nuke them, imo. - Alan3354 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:04:51 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-210 Some of us are not familiar with Bayes Theorem/Law. Would you please explain the joke for us ignoramuses. My simple understanding is that, to calculate the probability of an asterioid impact on 15th Nov 2008 given the Boylan exercise, you need to know the prior probability of an asteriod impact on 15th Nov 2008, and the prior probability of the Boylan exercise being successful at preventing asteriod impacts. We clearly do not know any of these probabilities. I know a joke loses it's impact if you have to explain it, but please indulge us. BJ (You have to be an Australian to understand "Please Explain") - BillyJoe Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:08:28 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-209 Jeff, I'm glad to see it was just a typo! ;) BJ - BillyJoe Sat, 22 Nov 2008 07:14:19 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-207 Fixed the billion/million typo. - JeffWagg Sat, 22 Nov 2008 05:22:40 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-205 What evidence? The Boylan received information about 2008 UL3 via the internet like anyone else could have and can? He's a charlatan, and a very bad one at that! - AMFCook Sat, 22 Nov 2008 04:45:41 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-203 7.5 million miles is big. Let's be glad it isn't 7.5 thousand million, because then we'd have a problem of translation. The American trillion is sometimes the British billion, as we don't have milliards at all. - DrMatt Sat, 22 Nov 2008 03:34:58 +0100 http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/307-bulletin.html#comment-202 It is certainly great news that the earth was not destroyed by an asteroid on 15th November (rather aptly given that it was Herschel's birthday). I think we must be very grateful to Dr Boylan and his team for their Joint Psychic Exercise that clearly worked in keeping us safe. Certainly the balance of evidence is in Dr Boylan's favour: he can demonstrate that, following his Joint Psychic Exercise, the world was not destroyed while sceptics can never prove the negative that we wouldn't have been destroyed had the Joint Psychic Exercise not taken place. Many thanks to Dr Boylan from those of us who understand Bayes' theorem. - Chris Hobbs Sat, 22 Nov 2008 02:23:20 +0100