A Modern Day Miracle Man - Establishes the Supernatural Realm

quote:

---

Aviation accidents by the way are not totally likely events they are uncommon even though they occur. To demonstrate this I will provide you with a few stats from planecrashinfo.com, according to this site the number of recorded fatal plane crashes involving commercial aircraft from 1950-2008 is 1,300.

---

The first problem here is that TB Joshua counts personal and military flights as well as commercial flights. You should use more complete figures.The second is that air travel has dramatically increased over the last fifty years. An average over that period of time cannot be trusted to give us a figure that applies today.

quote:

---

There has been close to 58 years between 1950-2008, in total these 58 years consisted of close to 21199 days. Assuming each individual crash corresponds to one day, only 1,300 days in this period of time witnessed a plane crash the remaining 19899 days were accident free excluding non-fatal crashes.

---

And excluding military crashes, and crashes of private planes...In contrast the full database for 2008 shows 59 crashes where crew or passengers died (and one where the people on the plane survived but 47 people on the ground were killed). More than one a week. The 2007 figures show 52 such crashes.

quote:

---

In view of this facts, plane crashes although they do occur are rare events, and may not occur for months at a time

---

The full database shows that there was no month in 2007 or 2008 without a fatal crash.

quote:

---

This is no problem at all, his prophecy is still too incredible, to be a coincidence, no amount of babbling will change the fact that the prophecy was very detailed, in fact, TB Joshua appears to have known that not only one kind of aircraft would be involved in this crashes but various kinds of them, that is why he avoids from mentioning the type of aircraft and simply states "Those of you who would be flying".
and this makes it more amazing.

---

In other words the fact that you used a figure which is too low, makes the prophecy "more amazing".

quote:

---

The stats I gave you enclose these 50 years and really looking at the numbers it hasn't increased as much as you are suggesting. The bottom line is they number of recorded aviation accidents is still too small for it to be called a common event, it is still rare.

---

You must be joking.

quote:

---

There are 5,286 accidents in the database of a number that is still too low when compared with the 21199 days that that existed between this years. And this goes on to show that aviation accidents are not common events they are still very rare.

---

Do the mathematics. 21199/5286 is just over 4. One crash every 4 days... Hardly a rare event.

quote:

---

You are the one who is joking it is rare, plane crashes are rare, considering that out of 21199 only 5286 witnessed an accident. And I should reiterate my point that common events like car crashes don't also happen everyday or week, etc, there is no guarantee that common things will happen on a particular date.

---

5286 out of 21199 is a little over 1 in 4. That is no joke. And let us not forget that you were claiming that there would often be months between crashes !And the prophecy wasn't as precise as you claim either. Joshua never said that there would be a crash on a number of specific days.

quote:

---

You are out of responses, the fact is you are overlooking my previous posts already dealing with this issue, that number doesn't mean much because if it did mean much there would have been many more days with accidents instead of only 5286 out of a whooping 21199 days

---

You were the one who introduced the idea of trying to estimate the frequency of crashes. You are the one who came up with the figures. I'm just doing the math. And that math comes out as an average of one crash every 4 days.

quote:

---

furthermore like I said in the previous post this accidents are not predetermined to happen once every four days, they can in fact happen more than once or not at all.

---

All of which is completely irrelevant. Look, I've got a maths degree. Basic probability theory is NOT a problem for me.

quote:

---

And some months go by without crashes to boot so my claim is actually supported by the facts, that there are months that go by without seeing any accident.

---

That did not happen in 2007 or 2008 as I've already told you. It seems that you are the one ignoring previous posts - AND not bothering to actually check the figures. It hasn't happened so far in 2009 either.

quote:

---

This is just a plain lie TB Joshua individually mentions those specific dates and warns people not to fly on those days.

​

Those who are flying, please take Psalm 91. If you are going to fly: 17, 27, 28,"

​

And he says in between 17, 27, 28. Write it down the Psalm 91 and sort of meditate on it.

​

"...It’s either you miss your flight; it’s either something happens 17, 27, 28."

​

and then he adds that it will also last to the end of the month. From "that 17 — the whole thing from 17 to the end of the month" and behold it does only last to the end of the month.

---

In other words I told the truth. TB Joshua never actually said that a crash WOULD happen on any specific day. He just gave a list of numbers and made it even vague by suggesting a crash on any day from the 17th to the end of the month (which is how it is interpreted). It was very, very likely that at least one.Even worse for you the only crashes listed on planecrashinfo.com for January 2009 occurred on the 4th and the 15th.
If we grant that the crashes really did occur then the planecrashinfo.com database must be missing a lot of crashes because there are 6 missing from just the 17th to the 31st of January ! So the 1 crash every 4 days is an underestimate, because TB Joshua counts crashes that aren't recorded in the database.And as we have seen if it didn't happen in January, the prophecy could be extended to other months. TB Joshua didn't SAY January, so if the crashes didn't happen in January you would have said that he meant February or March or whenever...We can even go further and point out that the crash on the 27th was of a mail plane with no passengers and no fatalities. "...it’s either you miss your flight; it’s either something happens 17, 27, 28." ? - not on the 27th. Nobody needed to miss their flight then.

quote:

---

TB Joshua did mention exact dates and all you can do is lie about it. Its a shame really the degree you are willing to go in order to latch on to your Godless world view and keep from repenting.

---

Except that I wasn't lying as your quote demonstrates.

quote:

---

It isn't irrelevant, it affects the crash rate of planes, if every one day in four days is supposed to witness a crash than we should see a crash in that manner, according to what you are suggesting.

---

No, it is irrelevant. If one crash happens every 4 days we should expect to see several in the 17th to 31st January. Because there are so many flights run by so many different organisations with so many different crews we can take them as being largely statistically independent. And the figures agree - there is no month without a crash from 2007, 2008 or 2009.

quote:

---

and this year so far did all months report crashes.

---

This year IS 2009, so you are just repeating what I told you. Despite your opinion that there must be many months without crashes there has not been one in 2007, 2008 or 2009. And as we have seen the numbers in planecrashinfo.com do NOT include all the crashes that occur.

quote:

---

Again you are lying as I have shown using his own words, he does mention the particular dates at first and only later on does he go on to say that from 17th to the end of the month, of course the crashes did start happeneing on the 17th and continued all the way up to the end of the month, but it happened on specific dates even though it started on the 17th it didn't just go on non stop it happened on specific dates following the 17th which TB Joshua did mention.

---

Again, I am not lying. He never explicitly said that a crash would happen on any of those days.

quote:

---

You are so fond of twisting facts to achieve your own ends.

---

Isn't it amazing how the truth makes you so angry.

quote:

---

Joshua was talking about the January month here no other month and its clear from the prophecy, again you want to blur the facts. And furthermore the prophecy was fulfilled in January on the dates he spoke of.

---

He didn't explicitly say which month. The only reason you say he meant January is because you found enough crashes. If there hadn't been you would be just as adamant that he meant some other month, You've already demonstrated that.

quote:

---

but not on the exact dates they were predicted, why did it have to be on the 17th instead of the 18th, why not the 19th etc, if they all both stand an equal chance of witnessing a plane crash. why did it start exactly on the 17th as said By TB Joshua and end exactly on the date again given by him?

---

As I have pointed out, the prophecy was not that specific. (And there were no fatal crashes on the 27th anyway).

quote:

---

Secondly It isn't irrelevant, if pilots are more careful, and control towers do their jobs better less crashes will be reported in the face of the probability you chuck out. Many things affect the rate of plane crashes and its not all black and white like you are maintaining. there are many air travels all throughout a month not only at month ends.

---

And if they are less careful etc etc. there will be more crashes. It IS irrelevant,

quote:

---

Plane crashes are rare events as I have shown many times already, and they can happen on any day of the week on any day.

---

As has been shown they are not rare at all. On average 1 in 4 days will see a crash according to the planecrashinfo.com database which includes NONE of the crashes cited as "proof" of the prophecy. So they are far more common than even the common "1 in 4" figure suggests.

quote:

---

he did actually, when he said that " Even when you are about to be checked in, something will happen that you will not be able to go — if it is going to take your life. It’s either you miss your flight; it’s either something happens. 17, 27, 28. "

---

And on the 27th that wasn't true.

quote:

---

There were in fact crashes on those days he warned people from boarding them in January, this cannot be explained as a guess, the specific dates make it impossible.

---

Withotu an accurate figure for plane crashes it seems unlikely. If we assume (conservatively ) that there are 3 times as many crashes as planecrashinfo.com records then there will be a crash on most days. The odds of success are not bad, even without the possiblity of moving the goalposts.

quote:

---

stop lying geez, you are fond of telling untruths,

---

No, it's just that you don't like the truth

quote:

---

I encourage all of you to have a look at the prophecy and see just How accurate it is, TB Joshua Mentions specific dates and the accidents happened on those exact dates and no other date. He was very very accurate.

---

You SHOULD look and see how vague it is.

quote:

---

How is it irrelevant if when they are more careful the accidents are minimized and when they aren't they increase. How can this be irrelevant, your claims are irrelevant.

---

It is irrelevant because you have utterly failed to show anything that would make it relevant.

quote:

---

Yet we don't see accidents happening after every four days and so, and in many cases for entire weeks including months as my earlier calculations revealed.

---

For the first point, that is what we EXPECT to see if the distribution is random.
On the second your calculations gave results that are clearly at odds with reality. As you have agreed there were no months without an accident in 2007, 2008 or for so far as we have figures, 2009. So why claim that your meaningless calculations showed anything, other than the fact that you don't understand what you are talking about ?

quote:

---

Yet another lie, I'm starting to question your honesty; the prophetic message was confirmed for the 27th as a FedEx cargo plane crashed in Lubbock, Texas, on the 27th of January 2009, the second date specified in the prophetic message delivered by Prophet T.B

---

According to your own Message 78 there were no fatalities, and as a cargo plane it would not have carried passengers anyway. So nobody needed to miss their flight to survive. I spoke the truth.

quote:

---

The crashes happened on the specific dates given by the prophet, on exactly those days, it starts on the 17th, as the prophet said, why not on the 16th or the 15th etc and ends at the end of the month as the prophet said again, why not on the 29 or the 1st of the next month. It is highly unlikely, that this could have happened it can only be explained as a miracle.

---

There were TWO crashes on the 15th in the planecrashinfo.com database - which shows how much you care about the accuracy of your claims. Even worse, your own report of the prophecy's "success" includes two more crashes on the 29th as evidence for the prophecy. And now you are claiming that there were NO crashes on the 29th - as evidence for the prophecy. Which just demonstrates what I said - the prophecy is simply not as specific as you try to pretend it is.You don't know that there were no crashes on the 16th January or on the 1st February any more than you "know" that there weren't any on the 15th or 29th. Not knowing about crashes - even crashes that you yourself reported - isn't much of a miracle.

quote:

---

No I seek and embrace the truth, its more than what I can about you. You deny the truth, and use all kinds of grandiloquence to suppress it. No amount of evidence in favor of the supernatural realm, irregardless of how convincing it is, will ever be sufficient for you, all yow will do is find ways to explain it in natural terms even when it is impossible to do so.

---

Which is why you claimed that there were no crashes on the 29th January EVEN THOUGH YOU HAD ALREADY CITED TWO CRASHES on that date.

quote:

---

I really think you're in denial of of the specificity of that particular prophecy, which states the exact dates on which aviation accidents were noted, the 17th the 19th and the 28th up to the end of the month.

---

The fact - as I have said - is that the statement is hugely open to interpretation. If there had been no crashes on one of those days it would have been ignored (and the fact that one of the days did not have a crash which fully fitted the description was and is ignored). There was no explicit statement about the month, so if January had not fitted then February, March or even a later month could have been said to have been the month meant (as you have already shown).

quote:

---

1. a Did Joshua mention the 17th as the day of a possible aviation incident in his prophecy delivered on 11th January 2009 If no explain why.
b Was a crash reported on the 17th of January in accordance with the date TB Joshua gave just 6 days ago?

​

2. a Did Joshua mention the 27th as the day of a possible aviation incident?
b Was a crash reported on the 17th of January in accordance with the date TB Joshua gave?

​

3. a Did Joshua mention the 28th as the day of a possible aviation incident?
b Was a crash reported on the 28th of January in accordance with the date TB Joshua gave?

​

3. a Did Joshua mention that this accidents will last up to the end of the month?
b Were crashes reported up to the end of the month?

---

Let us note that your questions admit that Joshua did NOT state which month he was referring to,The answers are yes except for 3b - no crash was reported for the 31st.Of course we can ask you why the crashes on the 15th were not mentioned (even though more people died in the Afghan crash than any of those "predicted" and the American crash involved a large passenger jet - instead of a helicopter, private plane or a cargo flight).

quote:

---

Is it possible and common for humans to state dates without being specif about the month if they are alluding to the existing month?

---

Just as it is possible for "prophecy" fans to decided that the month meant was whichever month fits the prediction best.

quote:

---

I'm surprised that you could contend the obvious fact that accidents are in a large part determined by the conscientiousness and responsibleness of the people involved.

---

I never said any such thing. The problem is relating this to the discussion (which you haven't done) AND it needs to be checked againt the actual figures (which you CERTAINLY haven't done).

quote:

---

That is precisely my point this accidents happen randomly they don't have to happen on a fixed/given date and because of this as my calculations demonstrate there are many months that go by without witnessing any plane crashes

---

Another demonstration of how much you care about the truth. Your calculations show no such thing. The actual figures - AS YOU KNOW - say otherwise. And you accuse me of lying ?

quote:

---

pbs.org agrees with me "Most years no plane crashes occur, or at least very few. So the number of victims per year goes up radically in years when there are crashes."

---

pbs.org must be counting even fewer crashes than planecrashinfo.org - because planecrashinfo.org shows crashes every month for 2007, 2008 and all of 2009 up to now. As you know. (Likely they exclude military, private and cargo flights for a start).

quote:

---

I don't deny that plane crashes do occur, but just because something occurs it doesn't imply that its a common thing

---

According to your own figures - which are probably a serious underestimate - the sort of crashes TB Joshua counts - happen quite frequently, with a mean of 1 per 4 days by the figures you gave.

quote:

---

TB Joshua doesn't mention passengers per se, all he says is whoever would be flying.

---

You miss the point - the crew would find it rather harder to miss the flight (and they would have to be replaced) - and NOBODY DIED.

quote:

---

This is a false statement its not hugely open to interpretation, clear dates are given and its clear also that the the prophecy was made for the January month. but you want to argue that it wasn't made for the January month because it was fulfilled during the January month, why else do you argue about the month?

---

No, it is an absolutely true statement. And you completely miss the point of my argument. I say that if January had not worked out TB Joshua's supporters would go on to antoher month. And we know that because that is exactly the sort of argument you have already made in another case.

quote:

---

Thank you for being truthful in your response to the questions I listed, and since you finally admitted that accidents did happen on the dates given by the prophet, you can not go on arguing that his prophecy was vague.

---

Wrong. The vagueness is an objective fact. It does not go away just because January happened to work out (ans as we have seen, it worked out less well than you have tried to claim).

quote:

---

Yes you sure can but its not a relevant question because the 15th is not part of the prophecy, the bottom line is TB Joshua prophecy is fulfilled very accurately.

---

THe fact that it is not part of the prophect IS THE PROBLEM. It should have been. The crashes were as serious as those you claim as successes, thye happened aftwer the "prophecy" was given. And do not forget that you tried to claim that there were NO crahes on the 15th, even though I had already mentioned them here and they are easily found on planecrashinfo.com.

quote:

---

What more can I say here.

---

If it was releavant you could actually explain HOW it is relevant - something you have not yet done. Or more honestly you could admit that I was right, and that it was not relevant.

quote:

---

I gave you facts provided on the Wikipedia about aviation accidents stating that 80% of crashes are a result of human error and more facts from another website saying the same thing. If 80% of crashes are a result of human error than how can human influence in crashes be irrelevant? Please just own up when you are wrong?

---

Nothing you have said suggests that it has any relevance to the point we are discussing. Either explain how this figure actually affects the crash statistics (using REAL statistics, not your guesses) or admit that YOU were wrong.

quote:

---

You didn't answer my question, please answer my question.

---

The answer is implicit.

quote:

---

25% is quite rare

---

25% us quite common. And now we know that the REAL figure is significantly higher.

quote:

---

only 5286 days out of a whooping 21199 days from 1950 up to the present time has had plane crashes, that means that 15913 days were accident free, how many months are those? ? assuming each month has got has 31 days we get 513 months without accidents of 631 months, subtracting the two figures we determine that only 118 months saw accidents, out of 631 months. It looks rare to me, if so many months could be without accidents, what then are the chances of any month witnessing a plane crash

---

Simple counts tell you NOTHING about the distribution. Your whole argument is just a guess. However, we already know that there are no months without crashes in 2007, 2008 or (so far) in 2009. All you are demonstrating is that you do NOT care about the truth.

quote:

---

also when being in plane crash is even less likely than winning the lottery or being struck by lighting

---

Which is meaningless unless you take into account the number of flights and the number of passengers carried.

quote:

---

http://www.nsc.org/research/odds.aspx. pbs.org agrees with me "Most years no plane crashes occur, or at least very few. So the number of victims per year goes up radically in years when there are crashes.". Whose lying?

---

Since the site you referred to earlier - planecrashinfo.com - strongly contradicts this, something is wrong. It is pretty clear that Nova was restricting the figures to commercial passenger flights (which includes exactly NONE of the "successes" - there was one military helicopter and all the rest were light aircraft). So at the very least it is the wrong figure to use.

quote:

---

Joshua didn't guarantee say that any deaths would result from this crashes

---

Wrong. What does mean, if it does not refer to deaths ? Why bother to mention a flight with no fatalities while ignoring a flight with 13 deaths ?

Here are two simple questions:1) If TB Joshua's prophecies are always fulfilled - and often quickly, why refuse to put it to a real test, using predictions that have not yet come true ?2) Why is TB Joshua "good" at predicting small, common, crashes (which likely affect nobody in his audience) but does not seem to have a record for predicting the big crashes where many people die ?For instance, if we look at planecrashinco.com's list of the 100 worst crashes and look at just those that ocurred in 2009 we have:June 1 2009: Air France 228 dead.
June 30 2009: Yemenia 152 dead
July 15 2009: Caspian Air 168 deadAnd we don't have a prediction for any of these ?

quote:

---

I'm not aware of any other prophecies that are ascribed to TB Joshua then the ones that are currently being displayed at his various websites and are in circulation around the web

---

In other words you only know of claimed successes after the fact.

quote:

---

But as I said in my last post, TB Joshua encourages the world to watch his live Sunday services because that is when he usually delivers new prophecies,

---

Don't you watch them ? And if he only delivers a few prophecies a year as you have just suggested, watching a service on the off-chance seems to be a bit of a waste of time.

quote:

---

I personally encourage you, Paulk to watch his Sunday services seeing that you might be at the heart of the next prophecy he gives

---

As far as I know, I can't, and from the evidence seen it is very rare that anyone watching is "at the heart" of one of his "prophecies".

quote:

---

That is like asking why Jesus or the ancient prophets of God didn't predict the Jewish holocaust, or the world wars or the rise of Islam, a religion that is so antagonistic to the teachings of God in the bible, and is to blame for a lot of bloodshed in our present world, and is directly responsible for the persecution of Christians throughout the middle east and Muslim Africa.

---

No, it is not at all like that. Unless you are saying that TB Joshua lived thousands of years ago. If he is predicting aircraft crashes in 2009 you have to ask why he only "hit" a few of the smallest ones in that year (not even the largest in the month of January) - and missed the bigger ones.

quote:

---

As a side note I'm glad that you owned up that TB Joshua is good at predicting events even if they are unimportant in your eyes.

---

I didn't. That is why "good" was placed in quote marks.What you are missing is that this is the exactly the pattern we would expect to see if he was a fake.

In other words the "desperate" measure of showing the necessity of seeing what was said BEFORE the event. And so far your only attempt to do so is to tell us to buy DVDs (which may well be edited after the event), watch TV channels we can't see (after telling us that we are unlikely to see an actual prediction!) or to refer to some skeptical oversight which - for all we can tell - does not even exist - you certainly have provided no evidence that it does.I suppose that your attempts to manipulate and misrepresent the statistics of air crashes - up to the extent of denying actual statistics in favour of completely bogus "calculations" DON'T count as desparate in your eyes ? Because I happen to think that making a valid point is less of a sign of desparation than a glaring denial of reality is!

quote:

---

Please that is a totally bogus statement, a completely unsubstantiated and bogus statement. My calculations are not misrepresentations of anything they are based on actual data I obtained from planecrashinfo.com, refer back to my calculations and point out a single figure that I simply imagined or dreamed up, my calculations still stand.

---

In your FIRST use of planecrashinfo.com you attempted to restrict the data to only commercial flights - despite the fact that the claims of success mainly referred to private planes. Using the full number saw a four-fold increase. And that is just one example there are plenty more.

quote:

---

refer back to my calculations and point out a single figure that I simply imagined or dreamed up, my calculations still stand.

---

Only as an example of complete nonsense.

quote:

---

You are the one who is ignoring statistics, your argument basically was, that every month starting from 2007-20089 reported an aviation accident using data you found on the same website and my calculations are also based on data from the same website and then you tried to conclude from this that aviation accidents are frequent, but, which is the wrong conclusions to make.

---

In other words I "ignore statistics" by pointing out the fact that the REAL statistics contradict your "calculations".The fact is that YOU ignore all the data on the distribution of crashes - and come to conclusions directly contradicted by that data.

quote:

---

My argument was that plane crashes are rare events although they happen, just like winning a lottery draw and being struck by lighting are rare events, which in fact have a higher chance of happening compared to being in a plane crash, and this does say something about the frequency of plane crashes, and For every statement I made I had a website to agree with it, in fact I was able to find websites that agree with me that plane crashes are rare but I could not find a single website that asserted that plane crashes are frequent events, which is what you claim. So to say that I twisted facts is just a plain lie.

---

And here you are doing exactly what you said that you didn't do - misrepresenting the figures. The figure we need to find out is the chance of a particular day having the sort of air crash that TB Joshua counts. The proportion of big commercial flights that crash is THE WRONG FIGURE because there are very many such flights every day and because TB Joshua includes many other flights. The chance of a particular passenger being killed in an air crash is the wrong figure (for the same reasons, and because there are often survivors). The number of commercial passenger flights that crash in a year is wrong, too for reasons I have already given.And the alternative calculation - dividing the number of crashes by the number of days is one that YOU introduced. It isn't great, but it is better than your alternatives. And as soon as the result was shown to be one that you didn't like you started to tell people to ignore it - not because you had anything better.

quote:

---

But I still used actual figures not cooked up figures

---

Your "many months without a crash" was "cooked up". It was not an actual figure and we know that because the actual figures contradict you.

quote:

---

Which is still a very small amount compared to the number of days that passed.

---

It is a very significant amount. It is the ratio that is important - not the difference. Therefore the fact that the number increased by a factor of 4 is more important than the change in the absolute numbers.

quote:

---

A rhetorical statement that proves nothing.

---

But still factually correct. Your "calculations" were complete nonsense.

quote:

---

Which are real statistics and which are not real statistics?

---

The actual figure of at least 1 crash every month for 2007, 2008 and 2009 is a real statistic. Your assertion that many months must go by without a crash is NOT a real statistic.

quote:

---

I gave you actually statistics that have been worked out by people in the field not numbers I made up myself. Here it is again being struck by lightning? (1 in 20 million)

​

Your odds of these two things are actually BETTER than being in an airplane crash (1 in 25 million)

---

They aren't made up - but they are certainly not relevant.

quote:

---

I did not ignore the data, I just made a logical conclusion that if so many days can be without crashes than at least a few months could also be without crashes

---

Actually you claimed that there would be MANY months without crashes. And you kept on claiming it, even after it was pointed out that it wasn't true - ignoring the real statistics.

quote:

---

Please you are being dishonest with the facts here,

---

By which you mean that I am being honest.

quote:

---

number one individuals have a big chance of being in car crashes because care crashes are common, individuals have a big chance of drowning because drowning is common, etc, but on the other hand individuals have a smaller chance of winning the lottery or being struck by lighting because both these events are rare and in fact according to the above stats individuals have a smaller chance of being in a plane crash compared to being struck by lightning and winning the lottery because because plane crashes are rare, its the obvious conclusion to reach, why should plane crashes be an exception. Note these events do happen but they are said to rare.

---

All of which doesn't change the fact that your measure of rarity is the WRONG FIGURE. TB Joshua didn't pick out an individual person and say that he or she would die in a plane crash. If we use the RIGHT figure - days including at least one air crash - including helicopters - they aren't so rare at all.Again you are simply trying to use the wrong figure to make TB Joshua look better than he is. And you are being absolutely obviosu about it.

quote:

---

Not really I provided a website that agreed with me on that but went even further to suggest that there were years that didn't witness accidents or at least only witnessed very few.

---

No, you didn't. You MISREPRESENTED a website as agreeing with you, but that is not the same thing.

quote:

---

Don't lie to yourselve the difference also does matter alot, because just by looking at the ration the odds seem a lot bigger but its clear from the number of reported aviation incidences that aviation accidents are rare when considered against the number of days that passed.

---

The only way to work out that aviation accidents are rare compared with the numebr of days is to CONSDIER THE RATIO. A factor of four difference means that accidents are FOUR TIMES MORE COMMON.

quote:

---

they are and I showed they are in my earlier post dealing with the same subject.

---

That is an outright falsehood. They are not, and cannot be relevant because TB Joshua never predicted that a perticular person would be killed in a plane crash. You need the probability of the ACTUAL predictions coming true, allowing all the flexibility of interpretation used to declare a success.

quote:

---

My concussion logically followed from the figures I resented. And no matter what you say air plane crashes are rare and the facts agree with me.

---

That is another outright falsehood. Your figures were entirely consistent with an accident happening every fourth (or occasionally fifth) day. The only way to work out the distribution is to look at the data relevant to the distribution. And you not only ignored that when working out your conclusion - you went on ignorin them even after they were pointed out.