Anonymous at Sat, 29 Mar 2025 07:36:46 UTC No. 16631550

>>16631537
That's a sexy ponytail so I'll go with right I guess

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Mar 2025 07:41:06 UTC No. 16631553

>>16631537
>probability of the multiple theories
Did you mean each? Either way, your question is inherently stupid. Those are tools, not facts.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Mar 2025 08:21:35 UTC No. 16631571

>>16631537
have you noticed that they always place onto the guy the role of doing things the old way & the girl the new out of the box way?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Mar 2025 08:29:04 UTC No. 16631574

>>16631571
Have you noticed that the guy always wears necklaces too?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Mar 2025 16:31:44 UTC No. 16631879

>>16631571
>the girl the new out of the box way?
You know Bayesian statistics is older than frequentist statistics, right? Bayesianism (or inverse probabilities as it was called) only went out of favour around the early 20th century due to Fishers work. Really, what were seeing now is just a resurgence of an older (and imo a better) idea.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Mar 2025 20:23:06 UTC No. 16632053

>>16631537
neither

Anonymous at Sun, 30 Mar 2025 18:54:44 UTC No. 16632996

>>16631537
Dempster Shafer theory