[extropy-chat] double aargh

[Damien Broderick]

At 01:38 PM 12/18/2004 -0500, Eliezer wrote:

>>  his controlled results in that poster were 28.08% cf. MCE of 20%, an 
>> excess not of 70% but of 40.40% This is still impressive, but not as 
>> wonderful as I'd suggested.
>
>I'm claiming this as another successful prediction, y'know.

Okay, but I wasn't writing a scientific paper for publication, I was 
babbling on an email list shortly after waking up. If you like, go back to 
my original blooper (70% hits rather than 50% hits) where the claimed 
excess is 40% above supposed chance expectation. This +40%, under control, 
was the datum lodged in my mind, then the rest was reconstituted in error 
from the incorrect p value. Do you predict *that* will be bogus?

Damien Broderick