Posted by Thanz
I will say again, however, that one doesn't necessarily need a background in statistics to talk about a logical counting method for JE transcripts.
True. Why would they?
Beyond that, Thanz, I find it interesting that Bill's apparently being given credit for some kind of "superior" knowledge of statistics. What has he demonstrated in this thread that would warrant anyone deferring to
him about anything?
If anyone knows of examples of where Bill has displayed this great intellect and mastery of statistics as related to the 'J' count questions, please, please re-post it so we can -all- marvel at his great intellect and wisdom!
But no one will,
because it just isn't here.
Thanz, on the other hand, has done everything Bill has asked of him in this lengthy argument....done the 'J' count, used Poisson, explained and compared both their methods, given clear examples and analogies to illustrate -his- points....the flaws and questions related to Bill's method...and the issues involved with each. And he hasn't done this as a believer in JE (since he isn't), but only to keep the arguments accurate, fair and honest.
I hope Thanz won't mind me saying that he has also made all his points (repeatedly) with
incredible patience and civility, as well as finding new ways to make them clearer, in the hope of elevating the level of discussion (which, imo, his posts have consistently done).
Where has
Bill shown an equal grasp of the issues? Where has
Biill demonstrated a similar kind of clarity in explaining his own counting preference and critiquing others'?
Where has Bill (unlike Thanz) actually addressed the questions his counting method raised?
Bill hasn't done any of that. And not only does he try to impede discussion at every turn, his every post drips with unprovoked rudeness, slurs, and mockery, instead of offering genuine responses to the questions that have been raised.
I don't see why anyone should feel inferior to
Bill or his alleged "grasp of statistics"
at all.
