10 Comments
- lukeev, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1From the article:
"It is an extremely simple model but it predicts absolutely fantastically well all of the characteristics of biodiversity that we were interested in," said Ignacio Rodríguez-Iturbe, the James S. McDonnell Distinguished University Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and the leader of the research group that published the report in Nature. - aladrin, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2Umm... Since they already know the data, they built the model to -reflect- the data, not to predict it. In order to say it accurately predicts it, you'd have to have the model set up and then find many places that had not been measured. If the model was still correct, -then- it can be said to have predicted it.
You can make some pretty silly models that accurately reflect your current data... There's no guarantee they'll predict anything. - Tyfud, on 05/13/2008, -1/+1Anyone else think that guy in the video sounded like the perfect James Bond villain?
An now Meestahr Bhuuund, I vill use myh veathur prediction dehvice for it's true purpose. To rhid ze world of feesh unless I am paid millions of ze American dollars! Zhere is nathing you can do to stahp me Meestahr Bhuuund. Especially not vhile you are tied to ze rocket set to go off in 15 minutes! Now excuse me vhile I attend to more important matters... - brazenreality, on 05/13/2008, -1/+0Dugged down for being a general douchebag.
- alacarde, on 05/13/2008, -3/+1I dont believe it can work. All of it just seems to fishy.
- strathound, on 05/13/2008, -5/+2Third, still cooler than slickstar. LOL.
- crichards7, on 05/13/2008, -3/+0More water=more fish. Well duh!
- HookmasterCH47, on 05/13/2008, -9/+2Second... with dignity.
Oh, and I love fishes cause their so delicious.



What is Digg?
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our