You consider that tale that NIMA made a map from satellite imagery that had no addresses on it and that then used a 1992 database to supply the addresses "improbable," especially in an environment of bureaucratic restructing and interagency rivalry and competition. This sounds very probable to me. All too probable and scary. Barkley Rosser -----Original Message----- From: Adam Souzis <adam at souzis.com> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Date: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 5:30 PM Subject: Re: Not so silly
>>>> "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." <rosserjb at jmu.edu> 05/11/99 01:48PM >>
>> BTW, for those who come up with half-baked probability
>>calculations and then declare that this could not have been
>>a mistake, I would remind you that the chances of the Three
>>Mile Island accident happening were supposedly something
>>like one-in-ten billion.
>
>Of course my "calculations" were half-baked -- I was merely illustrating
>just how very bad the luck was. There are VERY few people in the world
>that have access the actual facts of what happened -- everyone else, we're
>all just idly speculating. But do you really believe this event wasn't
>very bad luck if it was an accident? So sure, improbable things happen,
>but an improbable explanation is an improbable explanation. If you find
>every other explanation even more improbable, than go with that one. But
>don't dismiss other explanations as "silly" if the only explanation you got
>is improbable.
>
>-- adam
>
>
>
>