I now understand that the argument in the article is correct (and p=.99 in all scenarios). The formulation of the scenarios caused me some kind of cognitive dissonance but now I no longer see a problem with the correct reading of the argument. Please ignore my comments below. (Should I delete in such cases?)
I now understand that the argument in the article is correct (and p=.99 in all scenarios). The formulation of the scenarios caused me some kind of cognitive dissonance but now I no longer see a problem with the correct reading of the argument. Please ignore my comments below. (Should I delete in such cases?)
I wouldn’t delete, if nothing else it serves as a good example of working through the dissonance.
edit It would also be helpful if you explained from your own perspective why you changed your mind.
Second James’s preference and note that I find it useful as a reader to see an edit note of some sort in comments that are no longer supported.