RE: [asa] Explanatory filter

Oh, the "possibility" of a weighted bat comes into play. I relent. It
was a trick after all, however, the batter likely used an illegal bat.
It's like when a bat breaks and cork flies out. What are the odds cork
would find its way into a tree and wind up in a baseball bat?
 
Dick Fischer, author, lecturer
Historical Genesis from Adam to Abraham
 <http://www.historicalgenesis.com> www.historicalgenesis.com
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of David Opderbeck
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 10:32 PM
To: Randy Isaac
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Explanatory filter
 
Randy, I thought that's where you were going. So the point is that a
highly improbable event can happen; saying something is highly
improbable doesn't rule out that it in fact happened. Thus, even if
Dembski et al are right and evolution without design is highly
improbable, nevertheless it happened.

I don't think this is a terribly strong illustration. No one, so far as
I know, denies that highly improbable events can happen -- everyone
knows "improbable" doesn't mean "impossible." The issue is what we can
infer as likely from what we actually know. We were able to confirm
that the improbable event shown in that video actually happened because
there were eyewitnesses to the event and people created contemporary
records of that testimony. We therefore have direct evidence, not only
circumstantial evidence, of the event. If we had no such direct
evidence, it would be entirely reasonable for someone to argue that the
event probably didn't actually happen as apparently depicted in the
video. At the very least, we wouldn't rule out a priori the possibility
that the video was staged. Without more, the improbability of the event
would at least leave the range of reasonable inferences to be drawn from
the video open.

Of course, we have no eyewitnesses to the entire history of evolution
(yes, I know, we can witness evolution in nature today, but obviously
not on the grand scale of the entire evolutionary process). This isn't
to raise some false questions about the legitimacy of historical
sciences, but it does, IMHO, render the range of inferences that can be
drawn from probabilities concerning the history of life more open than
the range of inferences that can be drawn about an improbable event as
to which there is testimony from contemporaneous witnesses.

If you think about it, we reason this way all the time in everyday life.
There are lots of possible explanations for things I observe that I
discard for practical purposes because they are so highly improbable.
Yes, it's possible that someone poisoned the Tylenol I'm about to take,
but it's so improbable that I discard it as a working hypothesis. The
fact that Prado's bat really performed that unlikely feat doesn't cause
me to hesitate about the long tails on the probability curve concerning
my Tylenol one bit.
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Randy Isaac <randyisaac@comcast.net>
wrote:
Yes, Steve, you identified it correctly. It really did happen. There are
a lot of fixed cameras in addition to the manned ones. When I was a boy
playing baseball the ends of the bats were convex instead of concave so
it would have been even less probable.

I just thought this was an interesting object lesson about how we
normally react when we encounter an extremely rare event. Probabilities
are hard to quantify. Now, if only someone had specified this complex
occurence ahead of time instead of commenting on it afterwards...

Randy

----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Matheson"
<smatheso@calvin.edu>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:37 PM

Subject: Re: [asa] Explanatory filter

The batter was Martin Prado of the Atlanta Braves. The improbable event
occurred in a game with the Mets in September of 2007. Discussion at
the time centered on neither peculiar camera angles nor invisible
strings, but on whether Prado's bat was oddly weighted. Personally, I
think it's just an improbable event, sort of like an evangelical
employing critical thought. I've ruled out chicanery, at least because
that really is Keith Hernandez' voice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mart%C3%ADn_Prado

Steve Matheson
"Randy Isaac" <randyisaac@comcast.net> 05/25/08 10:13 PM >>>
How would we apply the explanatory filter to this video? Can we
determine by probabilities whether it was edited? Or designed?

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1775904

Randy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology 
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.