youneverknew777 said: What you are saying re: crashed cars is that it's still possible that it could have naturally happened in those cases even if it is generally rare and unlikely. The thing is, we know the circumstances of those cases so we know that it is absurd for that to have happened. You can go watch the footage of the Hastings crash, and the Paul Walker story is almost as absurd.



I'd say he does have a need to prove that he is a real person, if he doesn't want to be bugged about it. Surely there is some way that he could prove it and put it to rest.

63 is not even old, I'm confused as to why he posed the question of the thread title in the first place. I wouldn't call 'soon' 10 years. At 63 most people would expect Williams to have 10 years left at least, and plenty of actors live into their late 70s and into their 80s. 63 is not old. Click to expand...

To say it is absurd would be to say there is a contradiction. I doubt you can show there is a contradiction within the circumstances and the fire.There is no way he can prove he is a real person. Nothing he can show you would ever logically entail that he is who he says he is. All you can do is make judgements based on the data. So for any amount of data you receive you can simply raise or lower your degree of certainty that he is a real person, but your degree of certain can never go to 1. Given that, all he can do it post additional data to raise the probability that he is a real person. Since it is already extremely probable I see no reason for him to do such a thing.In regards to Williams, DIC already explained why he made the thread he did. You can say "For any arbitrary celebrity, the probability that they would die at 63 is low". But that is not enough to make a good judgement on Williams. At best you can call that your prior probability. However you must factor in his health, his alcoholism, his past drug addictions, his family issues, his depression, etc. When those are factored in the probability of him making it to 80 are lowered which is exactly what DIC was saying. To be exact, DIC said both Williams health and depression gave good reason to think he would be gone soon (Which was never defined, so he could have meant 1 month from then, 6 months, a year, etc).As an example, suppose that among 100 people 90/100 do not smoke, 5/90 will get lung cancer, and 8/10 smokers will get cancer. While the probability of an arbitrary person getting lung cancer is low the probability of a smoker getting cancer is high. Your reasoning ignores the additional data like it would be here to ignore cancer in assessing one's probability of having cancer. Given that, your assessment of Williams' life expectancy is problematic.