tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post3104849697282737170..comments2023-10-29T06:41:23.910-07:00Comments on Halfway There: Punctuation for thee and meZenohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09058127284297728552noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-64552862669307327942011-07-04T09:53:43.017-07:002011-07-04T09:53:43.017-07:00Well, Kathie, I had to do some research, as I was ...Well, Kathie, I had to do some research, as I was ignorant of Zeno's Paradoxes. But, no, I don't think Ham's Goof--as it will henceforward be known--is in the same category with Zeno's Paradoxes. That is, unless our host blogmaster has some different paradoxes than the ancient Zeno. Disclaimer: I am not a mathematician; there may very well be a relationship between Zeno's Paradox and Ham's Goof that I am too blind to see.ERinSTLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02207945200397023316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-25986745761496080042011-07-03T14:47:03.388-07:002011-07-03T14:47:03.388-07:00ERinSTL -- analogous to, ahem, Zeno's Paradox,...ERinSTL -- analogous to, ahem, Zeno's Paradox, no?Kathienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-55062119167577419922011-07-03T11:54:06.353-07:002011-07-03T11:54:06.353-07:00Besides all the wrong you've mentioned, Ham...Besides all the wrong you've mentioned, Ham's math skillz aren't what he thinks they are, either.<br /><br />He commits the classic high-school error of assuming that the ratio of (40% greater in the past):today is equivalent to the ratio of past:(40% less today).<br /><br />Applying his decay rate of 5% per century over 10 centuries takes us to 0.95^10, or 59.9%, which is suspiciously congruent to a magnetic field that is 40% less today than it used to be. <b>Not at all</b> congruent to the situation he bases his calculation on: a magnetic field that was 40% stronger 1000 years ago. He should have stated a decay rate of about 3.3% per century.<br /><br />Probably nit-picking, given all the rest of his errors. But still, clear evidence that he did it wrong.ERinSTLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02207945200397023316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-12121381546457741722011-07-02T21:26:48.727-07:002011-07-02T21:26:48.727-07:00You may find this hard to believe, Kathie, but Ken...You may find this hard to believe, Kathie, but Ken Ham participated in a Geico commercial parody a few years ago ("<a href="http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=DKZWWNNX#alertbar" rel="nofollow">Creation: so easy a caveman can get it</a>"). The tricky part is telling Ham apart from the caveman when they appear on the screen at the same time.<br /><br />Pretty amazing!Zenohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09058127284297728552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-48097275930653497812011-07-02T18:23:56.764-07:002011-07-02T18:23:56.764-07:00BTW, is it just my imagination, or does Ham moonli...BTW, is it just my imagination, or does Ham moonlight as the Geico caveman?Kathienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-77669868635707381282011-07-02T16:43:22.998-07:002011-07-02T16:43:22.998-07:00Sounds as though Ham never made it beyond linear f...Sounds as though Ham never made it beyond linear functions in the first semester of 9th grade Algebra -- not even to quadratics, let alone exponential and logarithmic. He's likely to answer a resounding "NO" to the title question in that parody Miss USA Q&A, "Should Math be taught in schools?" since a little more math knowledge would cause Ham's sheeple to start being skeptical of his pronouncements.Kathienoreply@blogger.com