Recent content by FactChecker

Does the Art Show allow AI? If there are judges and awards, I doubt that AI is allowed.

Yes, eye-color. In some countries, if a politician wears a tan suit, large groups will make fun of it for years. It's sad. (sigh)

Good point. Although if "learning" means being able to do the calculations, then I will never "learn" GR or QM in any form. I will remain intellectually satisfied with a general, vague understanding of the concepts.

Your sample of data, together with the premise that an attractive appearance biases the results, can support the Hypothesis that blue eyes are attractive.

Yes. 100% in the last 50+ years is high. That is in the sample data. The question is what to conclude. I disagree with the contention that the result is due to a wide-spread fishing expedition for oddities.

Does that matter? How does that change the OP "Universe"? If someone in China searched the World for strange happenings and found a group in Uzbekistan with all blue eyes, a Canadian would not care, or be surprised. Yes, and he has every right to. I would not when discussing it with a...

I start with the premise that physical appearance is important for political success. Then consider that I am not demanding a 5-sigma particle physics result. Finally, I think that your 1:10 number is far too low. That is why I strongly suspect that Canadians have a bias for blue eyed PMs.

I disagree. Any probabilities depend on the "Universe" that was relevant to how it was discovered in/by the OP, not on your situation.

That's a good point, but not fully applicable in this case. The OP does not ask "What are the most unusual things in the world?". That would truly be "trawling an ocean". The OP is Canadian and is naturally interested in his leaders, so the scope of a search for oddities is very limited...

Did you get the blues from eating kale? Did you stop eating kale after you realized you would rather be dead? ;-)

That's surprising. Maybe it's like the flamingos turning pink from eating algae and brine shrimp. ;-)

The only analysis I can add is that any Canadian politician without blue eyes should consider getting blue-tinted contacts. :-)

Examining the dates, it looks like they have been all blue since 1968. I would be skeptical of the assumption that tendencies before 1968 are still valid now. We might have to go back before color TV was widespread to get enough numbers, and that would clearly add a confounding factor.

What you are seeing is P(blue eyes | elected as PM). That is not the same as P(blue eyes). You are showing that there is a big bias for blue eyes being elected. I'm not surprised except at the magnitude of the bias. The next question is how the statistics of the bias can be evaluated.

Yes, that's the key. The binary search approach does not immediately benefit on the first question. It trades off the disadvantage that there can't be a definite match obtained on the first question for an advantage of a reduction to 26 cards if allowed further questions. If no further...