P 63 Airacobra

[Vraciu]

^^^^ Didn’t read.   Don’t care.  I stand by my original statement.   “Almost certain” is the correct terminology.

“Certainty is perfect knowledge that has total security from error, or the mental state of being without doubt. Objectively defined, certainty is total continuity and validity of all foundational inquiry, to the highest degree of precision. Something is certain only if no skepticism can occur.”

Game.  Set.  Match.

It's almost certain the P-63 saw combat against the Japanese in the summer of 1945, scoring at least one victory against an Oscar.    Operations by the Soviets  against the Japanese continued to the point that the Kingcobra saw the final combat action by a US-built aircraft in World War Two.

The evidence favors combat usage of the P-63 in Manchuria against Japan (August 1945) , including aerial victories on at least one occasion (Ki-43, 15 August 1945 - Miroshnichenko*).

--
 * One source credits this victory to Sirotin.

/Discussion


(Feel free to argue with yourself all you like.  You’ll still be wrong.   That’s a certainty.)

[Arlo]

[Vraciu]

(Image removed from quote.)

The name is Psycho!

 

[Arlo]

The name is Psycho!

Sure seems so. 

[Vraciu]

Sure seems so. 

Let’s give a nice big round of applause to our newest, bestest buddy....and big toe....Sgt. Hulka.   

[Oldman731]

Wrong.   Almost certain means the preponderance of evidence supports the assertion to an overwhelming degree, i.e. the probability of error is effectively zero.   People with brain pans bigger than yours, Arlo's, and mine COMBINED use "almost certain" to show a high level of probability that infinitely approaches absolute.    How many threes are in a third of a meter?    You get the point.   

It is in no way a pleonasm.

Uncertain is more nebulous.

Thus I remain almost certain (99.999%) the P-63 was used in combat against Japan.  I'll reserve CERTAIN for the day I see evidence that erases any lingering doubt I may have.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2yuela

- oldman

[Vraciu]

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2yuela

- oldman

Do you seriously think I am gonna’ let you Rick Roll me?   

[perdue3]

Wrong.   Almost certain means the preponderance of evidence supports the assertion to an overwhelming degree, i.e. the probability of error is effectively zero.   People with brain pans bigger than yours, Arlo's, and mine COMBINED use "almost certain" to show a high level of probability that infinitely approaches absolute.    How many threes are in a third of a meter?    You get the point.   

It is in no way a pleonasm.

Uncertain is more nebulous.

Thus I remain almost certain (99.999%) the P-63 was used in combat against Japan.  I'll reserve CERTAIN for the day I see evidence that erases any lingering doubt I may have.

(I'm done debating it.   I have better things to do and the airplane will never be added regardless, which is too bad.)

Almost surely is more accurate in that case. You proved my point, it is used in a mathematical sense, not in a lingual sense. If you write "I am almost certain about X because Y said it happened" that is very poor scholarship. It is poor simply because of your word choice. The word certain is a poor choice as is uncertain because they are black and white and there are very few certainties in history. This is why we make claims and back them with evidence or interpretations of evidence. I will also add that probability and probability theory is used to predict the future or to determine what will happen in various situations. We do not predict the past.

We can just disagree, V. No need to be so hostile and make cruel comments. I was simply saying that "almost surely" and its synonyms are meant to be used in mathematical conversations. If you disagree, that is fine. I will continue to not use "almost certain" and you are more than welcome to continue to use it.

 

[Shuffler]

New discussion..... kinda mostly

[perdue3]

I didn't witness FDR's inaugurations. I think you're forgetting that I've chosen history as a vocation. WWII history is very much a part of it. Professors don't grade 'almost certain' very high. But do the 'you're obtuse because I'm almost certain' dance. 

Are you a grad student at TTU? I would love to study under Dr. Forsythe. I have read his work on early Rome and Livy. His historiographic work on Livy is one of very few of its kind.

[Vraciu]

Almost surely is more accurate in that case. You proved my point, it is used in a mathematical sense, not in a lingual sense. If you write "I am almost certain about X because Y said it happened" that is very poor scholarship. It is poor simply because of your word choice. The word certain is a poor choice as is uncertain because they are black and white and there are very few certainties in history. This is why we make claims and back them with evidence or interpretations of evidence. I will also add that probability and probability theory is used to predict the future or to determine what will happen in various situations. We do not predict the past.

We can just disagree, V. No need to be so hostile and make cruel comments. I was simply saying that "almost surely" and its synonyms are meant to be used in mathematical conversations. If you disagree, that is fine. I will continue to not use "almost certain" and you are more than welcome to continue to use it.

 

Hostile?   So logic is now hostility?  Okay then.

Any way...

“Almost certain” is the correct terminology.

“Certainty is perfect knowledge that has total security from error, or the mental state of being without doubt. Objectively defined, certainty is total continuity and validity of all foundational inquiry, to the highest degree of precision. Something is certain only if no skepticism can occur.”

Thus, “almost certain” is more precise than “uncertain” which can have an almost (uh oh) unlimited variation in terms of nuance.

“Almost certain” is far more (uh oh) precise than “uncertain” is.

In regard to “uncertain” : “All eagles are birds but not all birds are eagles.”   There is NOTHING to preclude a modifier to “certain” in order to communicate a degree of certainty or uncertainty.

I stand by my original statement and its unassailable terminology.   Unless you can show me film of the P-63 vs Ki-43 engagement then “almost certain” is as good as it gets.   Only the participants *could* know for sure (to a certainty*), and they’re dead. That said, this should not preclude the addition of the P-63 to AH3 by any reasonable, objective, history-based standard. 

Now back to your regularly scheduled gnat straining.    Good Lord what a colossal waste of time this has been. 

—
* Even the fog of war could intervene to an extent making CERTAINTY impossible.

[Vraciu]

New discussion..... kinda mostly

*Almost glares at Shuffler*

[Arlo]

Are you a grad student at TTU? I would love to study under Dr. Forsythe. I have read his work on early Rome and Livy. His historiographic work on Livy is one of very few of its kind.

Actually, undergrad. I'm on the slow but steady road of 12 credit hours per semester. I don't have the endurance and stamina of the younger crowd that run me over in Holden Hall. I've had Forsythe for Western Civ I, however. At Tech he literally wrote the book (as you infer) and he's the Chair of Ancient History. He basically lectures by reading it to us (braille in his pocket). I finally got the rest of the class to ask him questions by, well, asking him questions. He seemed genuinely glad that there were students in his undergrad class that showed interest. He's a good man. So is Dr. Bell. I had him for an overall study in WWII. He retired last semester and many of us hated to see him go. I might visit him at his digs in Taos. Another good prof is Lutjens. I had him for my Nazi Era class and will have him again this fall for my Weimar republic class. He's fairly young and has the looks and mannerisms of Jack Lemon (imo). He seemed a bit surprised when I told him that.

[perdue3]

Actually, undergrad. I'm on the slow but steady road of 12 credit hours per semester. I don't have the endurance and stamina of the younger crowd that run me over in Holden Hall. I've had Forsythe for Western Civ I, however. At Tech he literally wrote the book (as you infer) and he's the Chair of Ancient History. He basically lectures by reading it to us (braille in his pocket). I finally got the rest of the class to ask him questions by, well, asking him questions. He seemed genuinely glad that there were students in his undergrad class that showed interest. He's a good man. So is Dr. Bell. I had him for an overall study in WWII. He retired last semester and many of us hated to see him go. I might visit him at his digs in Taos. Another good prof is Lutjens. I had him for my Nazi Era class and will have him again this fall for my Weimar republic class. He's fairly young and has the looks and mannerisms of Jack Lemon (imo). He seemed a bit surprised when I told him that.

Very cool, you are very lucky. There have been two times where I have agreed with an historian regarding Livy's abilities as an historian. Dr. Forsythe was the first I agreed with. I have not been in Ancient History my entire career, so I have not studied under many specialists. In undergrad, my capstone regarded the historiography of the French Revolution with an emphasis on Marxism and its counters.

Anyway, to me and to many, Dr. Forsythe is an ancient history all-star. Good luck in your studies.

[Arlo]

Thank you. I had no idea you were also history crazed. I might have to add you to my academic e-pen-pal list, if you want.  I'm planning to study abroad at TTU's Seville campus next summer.