tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post1574842743901682927..comments2022-08-07T07:01:49.973-04:00Comments on NT Blog: The Jesus Family Tomb: Some Further ThoughtsMark Goodacrehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-34647927628357135732007-03-03T19:39:00.000-05:002007-03-03T19:39:00.000-05:00BTW, the expected value of 0.6 comes from "six cho...BTW, the expected value of 0.6 comes from "six choose four", times 1/25.<BR/><BR/>The expected value of 8.4 comes from "ten choose four" times 1/25.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-45097923107294307212007-03-03T19:33:00.000-05:002007-03-03T19:33:00.000-05:00Again, let me repeat that the number they are tryi...Again, let me repeat that the number they are trying to calculate (even if they got it right, which they don't) does not tell you the likelihood of finding a family during that time with those four or five names in them. It attempts to give you the expected value for the number of tombs you would expect to find on average given certain assumptions.<BR/><BR/>The bottom line is that the simplicity of the methodology and the fundamental nature of these errors that I described makes me question the seriousness and integrity of this entire project. I expected to find some questions of interpretation and issues of data bias due to archaeological assumptions, but instead I found glaring basic mathematical flaws.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-61829691092821971812007-03-03T19:27:00.000-05:002007-03-03T19:27:00.000-05:00There were four ossuaries without names. If you as...There were four ossuaries without names. If you assume a thousand identical tombs (which is what the Cameron documentary essentially does) and treat those four unnamed ossuaries as having any possible name that increases the expected value to 8.4 tombs. In other words, out of a thousand tombs with ten ossuaries, youâ€™d expect to find 8.4 tombs with those four names out of ten. Admittedly this involves a particular interpretation of how to deal with the unnamed ossuaries. It is the harshest against the Cameron documentary claims, but that is not unreasonable given that the documentary has the burden of proof, so to speak. Archaeological and historical knowledge would help one have a better idea of how to deal with the four unnamed ossuaries. Ignoring them is a possibility, but would seem to me to be less likely to be correct than including them somehow.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-44541761726954801892007-03-03T19:26:00.000-05:002007-03-03T19:26:00.000-05:00There were actually six names found in the Talpiot...There were actually six names found in the Talpiot tomb. That increases the expected value to 3/5. In other words, you'd expect to find 0.6 tombs, given our assumptions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-87472651603884367552007-03-03T19:24:00.000-05:002007-03-03T19:24:00.000-05:00They list five names and throw out one because it ...They list five names and throw out one because it is of questionable relevance, even to the documentary makers. But you can't just throw it out. You have to then say, what is the probability of finding four names out of five to be those four names, plus a fifth name which could be anything. That increases the expected value to 1/5, or 0.2 tombs. (Five choose four, times 1/25)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-61060656245434493262007-03-03T19:22:00.000-05:002007-03-03T19:22:00.000-05:00Even if you ignore the various interpretive proble...Even if you ignore the various interpretive problems as well as the many problematic mathematical issues such as the existence of other ossuaries and names in the Talpiot tomb, the number of total tombs, the variation in sizes and numbers of names in those tombs, there is one very simple issue which even a first year student would recognize.<BR/><BR/>Their calculation depends on finding those five names in the listed order. It doesn't take into account the probability of finding those names in a different order.<BR/><BR/>If you adjust the calculation just to include all possible orders (4!=24) you increase the expected value to 1/25, or 0.04 tombs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-43497001570537872772007-03-03T19:12:00.000-05:002007-03-03T19:12:00.000-05:00From an interpretive standpoint you have to unders...From an interpretive standpoint you have to understand that the final number the documentary folks are attempting to calculate is an expected value, not a probability, as they incorrectly suggest. The number represents the average number of tombs you would expect to find with those names if you could investigate every tomb if there were 1000 total tombs and each tomb had the same number of names. (This is known as an "expected value" or "average value.") They attempt to calculate the probability of a given tomb having a particular set of names, then multiply that probability by the total number of tombs. This tells you how many tombs you expect to find on average.<BR/><BR/>Therefore, the number they come up with is highly dependent on the number of tombs during that time period. The higher or lower the total number of tombs, the higher or lower number of tombs with those four names you would expect to find.<BR/><BR/>Thus the number they are trying to calculate (even if they got it right, which they don't) does not tell you the likelihood of finding a family during that time with those four or five names in them. In other words, there might be many, many families with people of those names in them, but because only a small percentage of families had tombs, the number of tombs you expect to find is small.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-16298030957683924322007-03-03T12:59:00.000-05:002007-03-03T12:59:00.000-05:00Greetings Dr. Goodacre,Since your e-mail is choc-a...Greetings Dr. Goodacre,<BR/><BR/>Since your e-mail is choc-a-bloc, I thought I'd use the comments-board to let you know that my own essay on the claims in "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" -- including the supposed connection between the name "Mariamne" and Mary Magdalene, and the misrepresentation of the meaning of the statistics, and some interesting statements by James Tabor -- is online, at <BR/><BR/>www.curtisvillechristian.org/TombOne.html .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-2532534326740936592007-03-03T06:14:00.000-05:002007-03-03T06:14:00.000-05:00The more I hear of the statistical "reasoning" beh...The more I hear of the statistical "reasoning" behind the various assertions, I am reminded of a long-ago professor's take on a Hippocratic Oath for statisticians: "At least tell no lies..." :-)<BR/>-- IshmaelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com