> Audrey Wrote:
> > I've always thought science tests were essentially
> > blind tests, independent of the popular consensus.
> > If you have a group like Egyptology saying NO,
> > your tests are wrong and we are right, how will
> > science ever be able to contribute to this
> > retarded field of study.
> It is "ass backwards", it's called fudging the numbers.
> Achieving the test result that you want to hear
> rather than the test result that the blind test is indicating.
> Used to avoid pulling the rug out from under an
> entire knowledge base and leaving those that have
> built a life on that knowledge base and fear
> change in a vacuum.
> Controlled data gathering and censorship of
> research results. Even no cameras allowed inside
> the Great Pyramid. Why would that be?
Yes, it certainly seem like fudging the numbers. As least the way it's presented. Certainly it appears to be so in the Bonani, et al.'s '95 study:
- Something like HALF the samples were put in a "reserve" and weren't included in the study's conculsions, without stating the reason or criteria for omitting such a huge portion of data.
No forumula was applied to assess whether the population of samples were from a homogeneous population before "outlier" data points were identified and discarded.
No justification was provided for the formula the authors used to calculate the outlier threshold.
When the results still provided dates that didn't quite fit the traditional timeline (RCD produced older dates), the authors only suggested that the RCD method was wrong rather than also considering whether the timeline might requrie an adjustment.
When the results revealed similar construction times for several pyramids that actually are thought to have been separated by a century or more per the historic timeline, no explanation was offered to account for the discrepancy.
Seems like fudging.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 22-Mar-17 13:53 by Origyptian.