quote:
And alot of them saying its not crap. What's your point?
But if you read the material refered to above (the paper is here
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/StatSci/StatSci.pdf) there are issues raised with the "decoding". I haven't seen those issues answered. It only takes one who points out just how it is crap.
Also where did you get your "alot". I think you'll find that the number is in the single digits out of 1,000's of statisticians.
If you want to support the "biblical codes" idea then maybe you can find references which do a good job of answering the issues raised in the above paper.
One very large issue is the sensitivity of the supposed "result" on the choics made in picking what to look for. The whole thing only has any validity if strict rules are followed. Apparently they weren't.
You should also note that if the "rules" are used as was done by the WWR paper then "War and Peace" in Hebrew translation gets as good a result. Is it a sacred text too?
On balance it appears that the extraodinary evidence that would be necessary for such an extraordinary claim not only isn't there but in fact there is no evidence at all.
™ Version 4.2