Reply #9: let's see

[iverglas]

whether the point can be made so clearly and directly that even you cannot pretend not to see it.

In the space of 24 hours, a large number of events occurred, and were reported, in which Thing *X* happened. Quite obviously, a similar number of events would have occurred and been reported for any other 24-hour period in recent history. (Unless we have some reason to think that the 24-hour period in question was extraordinary, which we don't have.)

Someone allegint that Thing *Y* happens more frequently than Thing X not only is unable to produce ANY reports of such events in the last 24 hours, but is unable to produce ANY reports of such events in any recent timeframe at all.

Let's say that I provide you with 12 reports of lightning striking and killing people, in the last 24 hours, all over the world.

You're trying to establish that people are more often struck and killed by herrings falling out of the sky onto their heads (ask google for fish fell sky), or die as a result of spontaneous combustion, than die as a result of being struck by lightning.

You offer one ancient report of someone dying when s/he spontaneously burst into flames, or s/he was hit on the head by a fish far from water.

If someone says "pooh pooh", is s/he saying that the laws of physics, and meteorology, have changed since those things happened?

I don't think so. I think s/he is saying that IF IT WERE SO BLASTED COMMONPLACE for people to spontaneously combust or be hit on the head by falling fish, you should be able to produce SOME RECENT instance of it happening.

And IF IT WERE MORE COMMONPLACE for people to die as a result of spontaneous combustion, or being hit on the head by falling fish, than for people to die as a result of being struck by lightning, you should be able to produce MORE instances of the former than of the latter, and you should be able to produce instances that are EQUALLY RECENT.

But I guess that whoever it is that's controlling the media would just have to be biased against people who spontaneously combust or are hit on the head by falling fish, and that would be why you couldn't meet that burden of proof.

Right.

.