STAR TREK Logical Thinking #52 - Black Swan (Absence of Evidence Is Evidence of Absence)

[@CitizenPrime-tb7rp]

These ought to be required viewing in every school in the nation.

[@CHDanhauser]

Thank you!

[@andriod1622]

The absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence...Gin Rummy will love this guy

[@10191927]

Makes total sense. Thanks Spock👍

[@CHDanhauser]

You are very welcome, sir!

[@Barbutt]

This was a perfect time for Mirror Mirror Sulu and Spock. Sulu was very sure of himself, can’t say he was polite about it either. Me thinks goatee Spock would request his Agonizer!!!! Fun!

[@CHDanhauser]

Why thank you!

[@Barbutt]

@@CHDanhauser looking forward to your recent new Mirror episode … (word on the street)

[@Barbutt]

@@CHDanhauser PS! I run into these all the time debating (kindly) on a few topics… amazing how it gently makes them tuck tail. Even folks using multi accounts to make them seem in the majority… funny how a thread not visited in weeks suddenly gets 3 users taking a run at me in minutes.

[@DeconvertedMan]

Ah yes, one of my fav fallacies. :D The second one being the fallacy fallacy. Hey Spock tackle some Formal logic ... and Truth tables! :D

[@PlasmaCoolantLeak]

0:23 Mr. Leslie: "Oh, man, when Spock hears Sulu and Chekov...glad I'll be out of the room when he logically tears them a new one!"

[@leovalverde1508]

What's got Sulu all worked up about space bats? What did they do to him? Great to see the cameo by Mr. Leslie but I patiently await the return to the brig.

[@MichaelLevine-n6y]

Mr. Sulu may have a sound point. It seems very unlikely a biological life form could escape planetary gravity and fly through the vacuum of space. If there is strong evidence against a claim one may be justified in dismissing the claim. I feel justified in dismissing breatharians without investigation of their claim.

[@DarrenHughes-Hybrid]

This Black Swan is a great argument to use with people that don't believe in something that you know (or believe) to be true. "Just because they haven't seen it/one, they don't believe in it."

[@Nomed38]

We love that Danhauser!

[@CHDanhauser]

Back at you loyal viewer.

[@hemaccabe4292]

Once upon a time, being the IP holder gave absolute power over a franchise. That day is done. If the IP holder insists on not bringing out new content or bringing out garbage content, we can now make our own. I invite all my fellow Trekkers to enjoy another unauthorized novel completely free. Just google Star Trek Lost Destiny Race.

[@caiuswickersham]

To this one I say, "If solid evidence is found for space bats, I will accept it. Until then, Mr. Spock, I have to provisionally state that they do not exist. It's the claimant's burden of proof to show space bats exist."

[@zoppie]

So, you believe that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

[@caiuswickersham]

@@zoppie Only until evidence of existence is provided and it also depends on the plausibility of the theory. I hear hoofbeats, I can conceive of it being a zebra. A unicorn is stretching too far.

[@kingbeauregard]

Absolutely fair. When it comes to something like a species in a habitat, it's difficult to prove conclusively that no members of that species exist; we see that here on earth, where it sometimes turns out that a species isn't as extinct as we thought. Now if you can find proof positive of something that logically precludes a species' presence, then you can make a logical inference. As a simple example, salmon are animals that live in rivers, and there are no rivers in the desert (this is pretty well provable to any but the most obstinate jerks), so it is reasonable to conclude that there are no naturally-occurring salmon in the desert. To which Spock would cock an eyebrow and say, "well, DUH."

[@davidwuhrer6704]

That's a different claim from "they haven't found evidence and they never will."

[@davidwuhrer6704]

@@kingbeauregard Actually there are rivers in deserts.

[@roberthofmann8403]

Good ol' Mr. Leslie

[@eldergroan]

That would be best.

[@MatthewCaunsfield]

Always nice to see the ACR 👍

[@CardboardBots]

Good tip

[@CHDanhauser]

Thanks!

[@jean-pierrefernandez2460]

On point, as usual 😎

[@CHDanhauser]

Why thank you!

[@hemaccabe4292]

Great video!

[@CHDanhauser]

Why thank you!

[@paulkerridge6001]

Fantastic

[@CHDanhauser]

Why thank you!

[@mikebell2112]

Excuse me, I couldn't help overhearing. THAT WOULD BE BEST.

[@RedwoodTheElf]

Isn't this one also known as "Confirmation Bias?"

[@CHDanhauser]

Not exactly. I have a separate Logic Lesson for Confirmation Bias.

[@MichaelLevine-n6y]

@@CHDanhauser Can this be confirmed?

[@GM-vt6is]

Well, given the fact that space doesnt have an atmosphere, a species that would be able to *naturally* evolve for space travel would only do so in a planet with minimal or non-existent atmosphere. Space bats does, indeed, sound like nonsense. And absense of evidence when surveying thousands of different planets does tend to rather support the theory that, for this, it becomes evidence of absense, at least for most practical purposes (i.e., the realistic expansion sphere of the Federation and the relevance of tbe find).

[@CHDanhauser]

I would not assume that because a being was able to fly up into space that they evolved to do so. Perhaps their skin and orifices were airtight for some other reason and their ability to propel themselves very high just happened to allow them to reach exoatmospheric regions. Also, there is no such thing as evidence of absence. One cannot prove a negative.

[@GM-vt6is]

@@CHDanhauser Sure you can, I just did. E.g., you dont see flying tables - sure, it might happen that spontaneously one will get significantly more air molecules under it for long enough to hover, but it's fairly certain thats so statistically unlikely as to be irrelevant. An absense of something over a large enough sample is an indicator in itself.

[@lapimano2]

What you say is some kind of an evidence, but not a full evidence. By which i want to say, that based on this evidence, we can say something like "it is very unlikely for something like a space bat to exist but we cannot state it for sure". I still think the base claim of this video is true, what happened here is you put in a different factor into the model which was originally not part of, and with this extra content the end result also changed. Lets stick to the original thing. In short: you are talking about a different thing.

[@kc4cvh]

Logic! I'm sick to death of logic! Do you know what I think of your logic?

[@r0bw00d]

Answers in Genesis need to see this video.

[@thelaughinghyenas8465]

Thank you so much. What about the ST:TOS episode Obsession? It was a planet bound creature that went between star systems?

[@DeconvertedMan]

what do you want to know about it??

[@thelaughinghyenas8465]

@@DeconvertedMan , The creature was a "space bat." It was something that could fly from a planet into face. Since one had been discovered, Sulu was wrong. He should have remembered - he was there.

[@MatthewCaunsfield]

​@@thelaughinghyenas8465 it was a space creature, fair enough. I'd hesitate to call it a "bat" though

[@DeconvertedMan]

@@thelaughinghyenas8465 perhaps this was before that happened :)

[@thecaptain6730]

Yes, I’m sure if we looked at the star dates, we would find that this logical conversation pre-dates “Obsession” :)

[@jasontoddman7265]

Wouldn't the usual term for creatures capable of natural space flight be space *whales?*

[@CHDanhauser]

Whales don't fly, they swim in a liquid, while bats fly in a gas. Anyways, Sulu was commenting about some oft-theorized but never seen life forms called space bats. He was not coining the name on the spot.

[@jasontoddman7265]

@@CHDanhauser Lol. I never said the term would be *accurate,* just that it seems to be the term people actually *use.* And anyway such creatures always seem to massive and yet somehow fishlike anyway (therefore resembling whales), like the flying critters in the first Avengers movie. Far less often are they shown looking anything like bats (other than a Space Ghost cartoon from a few years earlier anyway). I'd prefer the term *Star Fish* myself, but most people wouldn't get the joke.

[@MichaelLevine-n6y]

A wail of tale.

[@SlimThrull]

Ridiculous. I've never heard of this Australia. I very much doubt it exists.

[@CHDanhauser]

I have been there, it exists. But listening to my single piece of evidence may be committing the Anecdotal Fallacy. ;-)

[@marvinm.messier1120]

Climate Change