Server:Apache...
The main IP address: 208.94.116.135,Your server United States,Lake Mary ISP:NearlyFreeSpeech.NET TLD:uk CountryCode:US
The description :ckwop me uk blog about me the messiah problem introduction in this essay i am going to argue that the probability of a messianic religion being true is approximately zero. the argument doesn't focus o...
This report updates in 29-Jul-2018
Created Date: | 23-Nov-2002 |
Changed Date: | 25-Nov-2017 |
Geo IP provides you such as latitude, longitude and ISP (Internet Service Provider) etc. informations. Our GeoIP service found where is host ckwop.me.uk. Currently, hosted in United States and its service provider is NearlyFreeSpeech.NET .
Latitude: | 28.759920120239 |
Longitude: | -81.345840454102 |
Country: | United States (US) |
City: | Lake Mary |
Region: | Florida |
ISP: | NearlyFreeSpeech.NET |
HTTP Header information is a part of HTTP protocol that a user's browser sends to called Apache containing the details of what the browser wants and will accept back from the web server.
Content-Length: | 4405 |
Via: | e5s |
Content-Encoding: | gzip |
Accept-Ranges: | bytes |
Vary: | accept-encoding |
Keep-Alive: | timeout=5, max=100 |
Server: | Apache |
Last-Modified: | Sun, 10 Jun 2018 19:29:37 GMT |
Connection: | Keep-Alive |
ETag: | "1135-56e4ea758cba0" |
Date: | Sat, 28 Jul 2018 16:48:24 GMT |
Content-Type: | text/html; charset=UTF-8 |
soa: | ns.hosteurope.com. hostmaster.ckwop.me.uk. 2010111102 86400 3600 1209600 14400 |
ns: | ns.hosteurope.com. ns2.hosteurope.com. |
ipv4: | IP:208.94.116.135 ASN:40630 OWNER:CAPEQUILOG - GridFury, LLC, US Country:US |
mx: | MX preference = 10, mail exchanger = ASPMX5.GOOGLEMAIL.COM. MX preference = 10, mail exchanger = ASPMX4.GOOGLEMAIL.COM. MX preference = 1, mail exchanger = ASPMX.L.GOOGLE.COM. MX preference = 5, mail exchanger = ALT1.ASPMX.L.GOOGLE.COM. MX preference = 10, mail exchanger = ASPMX3.GOOGLEMAIL.COM. MX preference = 10, mail exchanger = ASPMX2.GOOGLEMAIL.COM. MX preference = 5, mail exchanger = ALT2.ASPMX.L.GOOGLE.COM. |
ckwop me uk blog about me the messiah problem introduction in this essay i am going to argue that the probability of a messianic religion being true is approximately zero. the argument doesn't focus on the specific claims being made by a given religion but rather the type of the evidence we have for those religions versus the rarity of messianic figures. the central problem is this: messiahs (if they exist at all) have to be rare. the kind of evidence used to justify messiahs tends to be much more common than the messiahs themselves. this means the number of false positives would dominate the number of true positives, allowing us to doubt any such claim. this is not a new idea. this was a problem examined by hume in his work "on miracles". the presentation is slightly different. hume's argument appeals to probabilities but presents no raw mathematics to justify his point. this is one of those cases where doing the maths really adds power to the argument outlined by hume . i present the maths inside this essay. i have picked a slightly easier case then hume. the argument presented is one surrounding messiahs rather than miracles. the number of supposed miracles is much larger than the number of messiahs. the lower rate of claimed messiahs means the quality of the evidence in favour of them needs to be much higher. functionally, the two claims have the same effect in trying to argue that messianic religions have a low probability of being true. we can think of the evidence for a messiah as being a test that tries to establish whether a given person is in fact really a messiah or not. messiahs are so rare that any test we devise to identify them needs to have an unrealistically low false-positive rate in order to work reliably. in the calculations that follow, we find even under very charitable assumptions the sort of false positive rate needs to be around < 0.001% in order to give us a > 50% chance of the person under examination actually being a real messiah. bayes' law and conditional probability a police officer pulls over a driver for speeding. what is the probability that the driver was in fact speeding given that the speed gun indicated he was speeding? this is an example of conditional probability. the probability that he was speeding depends on the quality of the evidence provided by the speed gun. bayes' theorem gives us the mathematical machinery required to make sense of these sorts of problems. one form of bayes' theorem is given below: $$p(a \mid b) = \frac{p(a) \cdot p(b \mid a)}{ p(b \mid a) \cdot p(a) + p(b \mid \neg a) \cdot p(\neg a)}$$ this can look quite daunting but with a bit of explanation it is easy to work with. when we write \(p(a)\) we are asking for the probability that \(a\) is true. when we write \(p(a \mid b)\) we are asking for the probability that \(a\) occurs given \(b\) has occurred. likewise, when we write \(p(b \mid a)\) we are asking for the probability that \(b\) occurred given that \(a\) has occurred. when we write \(p(\neg a)\) we are asking the probability that \(a\) did not occur. finally, when we write \(p(b \mid \neg a) \) we are asking for the probability that \(b\) occurred given that \(a\) did not occur. what are \(a\) and \(b\) though? for our example, we define: \(a\) as being: "the probability that a given car is speeding (given no other evidence)" \(b\) as being: "a speed gun test result over the speed limit" \(\neg a\) as being: the probability that a given car is not speeding (given no other evidence) in this example, we're going to put some made up numbers in to the machine and see what comes out. let's say that 10% of cars that go past the police officer are actually speeding. this is our \(p(a)\) quantity. the probability that a car going past him is not speeding must be 90%. this is our \(p(\neg a)\) quantity. then we need to ask: what is the probability of a failed speed trap test given a person is actually speeding? let's say the test never gives a false-negative. if a person is speeding, it always detects it. this is our \(p(b \mid a)\) quantity. next we ask the complementary question. what is the probability of a failed speed trap test given a person isn't speeding? this is the false positive rate. let's say this is 5%. so of hundred non-speeding people, on average 5% will be incorrectly classified as speeding. this value is our \(p(b \mid \neg a) \) quantity. so next we plug in these quantities in to the equation above: $$\begin{eqnarray} p(a \mid b) &=& \frac{0.10 \cdot 1}{ 0.10 \cdot 1 + (0.05 \cdot 0.9)} \\ &=& \frac{0.1}{ 0.1 + 0.045} \\ &=& \frac{0.1}{ 0.145 } \\ &=& 69\% \end{eqnarray}$$ this result is surprising to people who are new to bayes' law. despite a 100% true positive rate and a 5% false positive rate we are just 69% confident in the result! the problem is the low rate of people are speeding in the first place. if just one-in-ten are speeding, then the one-in-twenty false positive rate is in the same ball park. that weakens the power of the test to the point where we expect 30% of the people to not be speeding at all. the messiah problem now comes in to focus. given the very low base rate of messiahs, just how good must the test be to have confidence a person is actually a messiah? to that question, we now turn. the messiah problem what is the probability that a person is a messiah given the evidence we have for them? this will be different for each prospective messiah and those claims would have to judged individually on their merits. a huge amount of debate would surround the parametrization of bayes' law and what each of the values should be. let's simplify the problem. for the sake or argument let's say we have a messiah detector. a device that we can point at somebody and it shows a green light if they are in fact the messiah and a red light if not. let's assume that our messiah detector always correctly identifies a person if they are in fact a messiah. however, when presented with a person who is not in fact a messiah it very occasionally makes a mistake and reports them as a messiah. the first interesting problem to examine is the connection between the base rate of messiahs and the false-positive rate of the machine. we want to know what false-positive rate do we need to have to detect a given rarity of messiah with a probability greater than 50%. we can find this relationship by setting \(p(a \mid b)\) to be equal to 50% and then solving for the false-positive term \(p(b \mid a)\). we assume that the true-positive rate is always 100%, as per the definition of the machine above. $$\begin{eqnarray} 0.5 &=& \frac{p(a) \cdot 1}{ (p(a) \cdot 1) + (p(b \mid \neg a) \cdot (1 - p(a)))} \\[10pt] 0.5 &=& \frac{p(a)}{ p(a) + (p(b \mid \neg a) \cdot (1 - p(a)))} \\[10pt] p(a) &=& 0.5 \cdot (p(a) + (p(b \mid \neg a) \cdot (1 - p(a)))) \\[10pt] p(a) &=& (0.5 \cdot p(a)) + (0.5 \cdot p(b \mid \neg a) \cdot (0.5 - 0.5 \cdot p(a)))) \\[10pt] p(a) - (0.5 \cdot p(a)) &=& (0.5 \cdot p(b \mid \neg a) \cdot (0.5 - 0.5 \cdot p(a)))) \\[10pt] (0.5 \cdot p(a)) &=& (0.5 \cdot p(b \mid \neg a) \cdot (0.5 - 0.5 \cdot p(a)))) \\[10pt] 0.5 \cdot p(b \mid \neg a) &=& \frac{(0.5 \cdot p(a))} {(0.5 - 0.5 \cdot p(a))} \\[10pt] 0.5 \cdot p(b \mid \neg a) &=& 0.5 \cdot \frac{p(a)} {(1 - p(a))}\\[10pt] p(b \mid \neg a) &=& \frac{p(a)} {1 - p(a)} \end{eqnarray}$$ as we can see from this that when the base rate of messiahs is small, that the quantity in the denominator is approximately 1. therefore, we can say in our analysis that the following relation holds: $$p(\text{positive test} \mid \text{person is not a messiah}) \approx p(\text{person is a messiah, given no other evidence}) $$ so in summary, if messiahs are a one in a million event, you need a detector with a false-positive rate of about one in a million to detect that messiah with better than a 50% strike rate. how rare are messiahs?
https://www.ckwop.me.uk/aboutme.html
http://www.ckwop.me.uk/the-messiah-problem.html
https://www.ckwop.me.uk/previousposts.html
http://www.ckwop.me.uk/rss.xml
Whois is a protocol that is access to registering information. You can reach when the website was registered, when it will be expire, what is contact details of the site with the following informations. In a nutshell, it includes these informations;
Domain name:
ckwop.me.uk
Data validation:
Nominet was able to match the registrant's name and address against a 3rd party data source on 10-Dec-2012
Registrar:
123-Reg Limited t/a 123-reg [Tag = 123-REG]
URL: http://www.123-reg.co.uk
Relevant dates:
Registered on: 23-Nov-2002
Expiry date: 23-Nov-2018
Last updated: 25-Nov-2017
Registration status:
Registered until expiry date.
Name servers:
ns.123-reg.co.uk 212.67.202.2
ns2.123-reg.co.uk 62.138.132.21
WHOIS lookup made at 17:48:26 28-Jul-2018
--
This WHOIS information is provided for free by Nominet UK the central registry
for .uk domain names. This information and the .uk WHOIS are:
Copyright Nominet UK 1996 - 2018.
You may not access the .uk WHOIS or use any data from it except as permitted
by the terms of use available in full at https://www.nominet.uk/whoisterms,
which includes restrictions on: (A) use of the data for advertising, or its
repackaging, recompilation, redistribution or reuse (B) obscuring, removing
or hiding any or all of this notice and (C) exceeding query rate or volume
limits. The data is provided on an 'as-is' basis and may lag behind the
register. Access may be withdrawn or restricted at any time.
REFERRER http://www.nominet.org.uk
REGISTRAR Nominet UK
SERVERS
SERVER uk.whois-servers.net
ARGS ckwop.me.uk
PORT 43
TYPE domain
DOMAIN
SPONSOR
123-Reg Limited t/a 123-reg [Tag = 123-REG]
URL: http://www.123-reg.co.uk
Relevant dates:
CREATED 23-Nov-2002
CHANGED 25-Nov-2017
STATUS
Registered until expiry date.
NSERVER
NS.123-REG.CO.UK 212.67.202.2
NS2.123-REG.CO.UK 62.138.132.21
NAME ckwop.me.uk
DISCLAIMER
This WHOIS information is provided for free by Nominet UK the central registry
for .uk domain names. This information and the .uk WHOIS are:
Copyright Nominet UK 1996 - 2018.
You may not access the .uk WHOIS or use any data from it except as permitted
by the terms of use available in full at https://www.nominet.uk/whoisterms,
which includes restrictions on: (A) use of the data for advertising, or its
repackaging, recompilation, redistribution or reuse (B) obscuring, removing
or hiding any or all of this notice and (C) exceeding query rate or volume
limits. The data is provided on an 'as-is' basis and may lag behind the
register. Access may be withdrawn or restricted at any time.
REGISTERED no
The following list shows you to spelling mistakes possible of the internet users for the website searched .