Originally Posted by
spare_wheel
Despite suggesting that ninjas are at risk of death Grillparzer could not find a single news report of a fatality in his area. Instead he posted a link to a collision in another city that took place 5 years ago. QED again.
To quote the great Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
If you had specified some parameters for the bet you made to Grillparzer, you might have demonstrated something. However, you didn't so you haven't demonstrated anything other than the fact that you are a sore loser. He called your bet. You lost. Q.E.D.
Originally Posted by
spare_wheel
Random anecdotes that are 2, 1, and 6 months old in a nation of ~300 million people do not an argument make. They do suggest that you have better google-fu than Grillparzer, however.
How many anecdotes do you need to make an argument? 300 million? You asked for one. We've given you 4. I suspect that there is no number that would satisfy you. Nor is there any level of detail that would satisfy your requirements.
Originally Posted by
spare_wheel
PS: Aren't you supposed to be a scientist? Perhaps you should dust off and review a probability and statistics text book.
It is a trivial question as I said above. A trivial question doesn't need probability or statistics because the answer is so obvious that probability doesn't measure anything.