View Single Post
Old Wednesday 6th March 2013, 09:47   #6
MJB
Registered User
 
MJB's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Holt
Posts: 4,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaco View Post
How did they calculate the probability of an eagle strike? What precision! They lost my interest at that ridiculous number.
That's where they gained my interest. I accept that a number quoted to so many decimal places is redolent more of 'truthiness' than accuracy, but it does hint at a calculation based on evidence and not on assertions. The derivation of that calculation I would like to see.

It would also have helped to have had the post split into paragraphs rather than as a huge lump of text; paragraphs make for comprehension of each point made and enhance the reader's ability to weigh up each point within the context of the message, which was certainly heartfelt. The immediate impression I gain when faced with huge lumps of text is: "Stream-of-consciouness-alert! Avoid!" However, this post was an exception, and was well worth the struggle.

As someone who in the now-distant past had much direct involvement with reducing birdstrike hazards in the Royal Air Force, I'm all in favour of approaching this kind of problem from an evidence-based point of view!
MJB
__________________
The fuzziness of all supposedly absolute taxonomic distinctions - Stephen Jay Gould (1977) "Ever Since Darwin: Reflections in Natural History".
Species and subspecies are but a convenient fiction - Kees van Deemter (2010), "In praise of vagueness". Biology is messy
MJB is offline  
Reply With Quote