quentron.com

[profitis]

The wheel itself is under scrutiny here markE not the numbers and figures around it. Over a hundred wheels actually..

[MarkE]

Such a response betrays that you do not understand the relevance of the problem as stated.  It suggests that as Sarkeizen asserts, and your prior statements suggest, that you do not understand probability theory.  Here is a hint for you:  In order for something to impact the likelihood of a second thing, there must be a causal relationship between the first thing and the second thing.

[profitis]

Yet you cannot deny that the human element makes it statisticaly much much more important @markE.at least we now have importance,if not evidence.the question is: now that we have human importance,will that be sufficient to prompt mr sarkeizen to engage my statement directly? We wait and see..

[sarkeizen]

Yet you cannot deny that the human element makes it statisticaly much much more important

LOL! 

Apparently you've never read any cognitive science.  Paper after paper and book after book.  People's instincts suck at data analysis.  For example a group of 83 human legal EXPERTS attempted to analyze supreme court decisions and their consequent reversals and attempted to predict future cases if your very, very, very, very stupid beliefs were correct they would have been highly accurate and much better than any calculation.

Sadly, the lawyers were only barely (9%) more right than wrong.  A simple regression analysis was correct 75% of the time.  Just to put it in perspective a linear regression is one of the most primitive tools available for correlation.  83 humans with all their senses and centuries of collective experience were absolutely no match for something that could be done with my cellphone.

There was another study that looked at something like seventy different professions which required human judgement.  The majority of them were also outperformed by a regression analysis. Which is why we have branches of math like decision theory.

People's internal pattern matching has evolved to stop them from getting eaten by raptors and eagles.  It's no accident that human progress correlates with computational power and data supply.

[MarkE]

Yet you cannot deny that the human element makes it statisticaly much much more important @markE.at least we now have importance,if not evidence.the question is: now that we have human importance,will that be sufficient to prompt mr sarkeizen to engage my statement directly? We wait and see..

I can and I do.  Nature does not behave differently because of anything some person or some people think or want.