Yes it's a statistical prediction. The 90% confidence interval will be correct for 90% of people who use this method. 10% will be wrong. Apriori you are 9 times more likely to be in the first group than in the second.
Once you start creating more and more variants of the the same pattern (double DA, other time frames) you don't really make the probability worse, you are doing p-hacking.
I don't see this as an alternative variant to fudge the numbers. To me this seems to be the correct way to do the calculation. This makes the above argument correct, that 90% of people that use this argument will be correct.
Whereas the original version assumes you are randomly given human, which is obviously incorrect. As most humans would not be born at a time where this kind of statistical knowledge exists. Just the fact that you ask the doomsday argument, shows there is something special about you, and puts you into a different reference class.
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Our local downvoter doesn't seem to have noticed that it doesn't have any effect on what is read or commented on as karma restrictions on posting also seem to have been lifted.