This is a good story that points out our inability to consider facts that are beyond our limited ability.

Although likely accurate, this article is painfully short. It has few details and leaves the reader with little understanding of how to avoid "folk numeracy." Having a single sentence on the second page adds insult to injury.

This article is mostly unintelligible. I suppose in the next installment he will tell us that we should believe scientists over our instincts. This led him to his belief in global warming in a May 2006 article in the Scientific American. He was terribly impressed by Al Gore who he considers to be a conduit for scientific information.

This article was way too short, apparently targeted to the indiscriminate sound-bite reader. It does seem to provide sufficient data to explain why we *sometimes* (and perhaps even frequently) under/over-estimate probabilities, but the examples -- and the "dream" example in particular -- ignored "inconvenient" improbabilities related to some such cases, and were thus, unconvincing. I leave open the possibility that had the article been longer than six paragraphs, I might have been persuaded that nothing happens in this life more commonly than probabilities would explain. But it would take more than a couple of generic explanations of vague anecdotal examples to get me there. In short, this article bit off as a topic something ... More »