Let me spell it out for you. The likelihood that When someone dies that it's from murder is less than 1%.
From your logic, that means because the likelihood is less than 1%, murder should never be investigated.
Police investigations, forensic science, DNA matching, murder trials, Detectives are all rendered redundant by statistics.
You can compute this too. ANd you can use your incredible logic here: Facts > murder.
You need to see why that situation above doesn't make sense. Once you do, you'll realize that the same exact logic that makes that situation make no sense is the EXACT same logic you're using to "compute" your new conclusion.
You need to realize there ARE additional facts here that render quantitative analysis impossible to ascertain and hand waving is the ONLY way forward. That is unless you want to actually go out there and gather the data.
You know logic, deduction and induction are alternative forms of analysis that can be done outside of science right? You should employ the former to know when the later is impossible.
From your logic, that means because the likelihood is less than 1%, murder should never be investigated.
Police investigations, forensic science, DNA matching, murder trials, Detectives are all rendered redundant by statistics.
You can compute this too. ANd you can use your incredible logic here: Facts > murder.
You need to see why that situation above doesn't make sense. Once you do, you'll realize that the same exact logic that makes that situation make no sense is the EXACT same logic you're using to "compute" your new conclusion.
You need to realize there ARE additional facts here that render quantitative analysis impossible to ascertain and hand waving is the ONLY way forward. That is unless you want to actually go out there and gather the data.
You know logic, deduction and induction are alternative forms of analysis that can be done outside of science right? You should employ the former to know when the later is impossible.