What Happens To The Scientific Null Hypothesis When Sasquatch Is Always Viewed As Being Mythical

[hiflier]

Does the public even KNOW about the Scientific Null Hypothesis? As researchers should we always try to spread the word about that?

[MikeZimmer]

10 hours ago, hiflier said:

Does the public even KNOW about the Scientific Null Hypothesis? As researchers should we always try to spread the word about that?

Not sure how you are connecting the null hypothesis, a statistical device,  that there is no effect, to Sasquatch. Could you explain your thinking?

From Wikipedia: (in a statistical test) the hypothesis that there is no significant difference between specified populations, any observed difference being due to sampling or experimental error.

 

I always thought that it was of little practical relevance, but I suppose statisticians will argue otherwise, and I am prepared to be corrected. I had to work really hard to understand statistics, so I probably missed something along the way.

 

 

[gigantor]

12 hours ago, hiflier said:

Does the public even KNOW about the Scientific Null Hypothesis?

 

Well, each theorem makes a different claim, thus each theorem has a unique null hypothesis.

 

Which claim (theorem) are you referring to?

 

[gigantor]

1 hour ago, MikeZimmer said:

Not sure how you are connecting the null hypothesis, a statistical device,  that there is no effect, to Sasquatch.

 

Depends if you can come up with a testable claim. For example, hiflier could use stats from the SSR to make a theorem which would have a null hypothesis.

 

[hiflier]

9 hours ago, MikeZimmer said:

Could you explain your thinking?

 

Sure. Specifically, in my own case, I contacted my F&W back in March of 2019 asking about the existence of the Sasquatch. After a few back-and-forth emails where I kept asking about whether the creature was real or not I was told that a state biologist would be contacting me. It turned out to be a phone call and the person I spoke was a really nice guy- very respectful and NOT condescending at all. I treated him in kind. In the end he said that they weren't sure the creature doesn't exist. I took his answer as him stating a scientific null hypothesis regarding not being able to prove something doesn't exist. In retrospect I think it was his only logical way to professionally close the discussion.

[guyzonthropus]

Hiflier...one could also interpret that as his way of implying that they do exist without putting his own neck "on the block" by presenting a conclusion that could be taken as an official statement of the agency, and therefore governments awareness of this creatures existence. Of course I didn't hear the rest Of the discussion or the general feel of the context that lead to that final statement.. In a way, it's pretty amazing that he dealt with you as a sane individual rather than dismissing the topic out of hand. Perhaps there is a shift in progress after all! 

[hiflier]

4 hours ago, guyzonthropus said:

Hiflier...one could also interpret that as his way of implying that they do exist without putting his own neck "on the block" by presenting a conclusion that could be taken as an official statement of the agency, and therefore governments awareness of this creatures existence. Of course I didn't hear the rest Of the discussion or the general feel of the context that lead to that final statement.. In a way, it's pretty amazing that he dealt with you as a sane individual rather than dismissing the topic out of hand. Perhaps there is a shift in progress after all! 

 

I don't have to tell you I was a bit surprised myself. I've told him early on that I would never bother him with anything but the most critical of subjects. It started with the WA nest discoveries, which he knew nothing about. A year later I send him an overnight audio from a wilderness location that had over one hundred tree knocks from 1am until sunrise. A year later,, just this last Fall, I sent him some DNA results to assess. Again I reiterated that I would never contact him unless I had something that I felt was scientifically important. He said not to worry at all about that because he always enjoys our conversations. It's a very good open door that I worked hard opening and so will not abuse it.

[hiflier]

As a follow up to the previous post, I had asked that if I got good evidence would he be willing to do an investigation. He said yes. After I sent him the DNA stuff he said he would forward it to someone that he knows at Purdue. I've not heard back yet on that and will do a follow up but only if I feel the time is right. In the mean time, I have been mulling over my next move. It has occurred to me that starting at the bottom and going up the ladder may not be the avenue to pursue. Instead, maybe going directly to the top of the ladder might be a better approach?

[RedHawk454]

Its why I want to become a knower

 

to know that they exist despite being told all your life that it's a hoax or a myth