*sigh*
In a purely causal, definitional sense, you are correct. There is not absolute certainty. In real life, that simply doesn't happen. **That standard is reserved for pure logic and mathematical proofs.** So if that's your standard of proof, then you will never elect anyone. You will never convict a criminal. **You will never know anything. EVER.**
However, in this thread, you yourself have used the phrase "**beyond a reasonable doubt**". *That standard has been met.* I've already shown you the numbers which prove that the bounds of uncertainty are so close to zero as to be indistinguishable from absolute certainty within our ability to measure. It is far, far, far beyond any standard of "reasonable doubt" that a fair justice system requires.
You ignored those numbers, and spewed some ignorant talking point about "statistics != proof". Clearly, you doubt the numbers, which tells me that you don't understand the numbers, but the fact remains. **Your doubt is not reasonable.** The standard has been met.
Joel [Minnesota] (npub1r3h…7lk9) Sensei (npub1eyu…43gw) SirCrocky of Cosmic Hi-Country (npub17tr…9dsg)
Sir Ryan Bemrose
npub10u…np5pu
2026-06-09 02:59:43 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…wdqy
Author Public Key
npub10usx3fj7rf0l8w86d2zjkxy9cnxrrh4qwt206r72p0q33m5ecxss7np5puSeen on
wss://relay.momostr.pinkPublished at
2026-06-09 02:59:43 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "12337b8263de81ba19c00462c1c41576cd2e14ee7b4daade06a6f80f1c07c4e8",
"pubkey": "7f2068a65e1a5ff3b8fa6a852b1885c4cc31dea072d4fd0fca0bc118ee99c1a1",
"created_at": 1780973983,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"7f2068a65e1a5ff3b8fa6a852b1885c4cc31dea072d4fd0fca0bc118ee99c1a1"
],
[
"e",
"d3e18d078c10b78e2b459016be478364c7560a42f515d9dd86fa54504a156994",
"",
"reply",
"9585910dd8d6de715bed5e8734cb43cefe3d536a5d85453b2647fd684352ba50"
],
[
"p",
"1c6e5ba398ab2ec4932d939354821596b40d61fbf1d88409a04ea947e568fb58"
],
[
"p",
"c939453230b46fa56398c351c8e6fd0ed78ca8f4a6cce143256e35205ebf01af"
],
[
"p",
"9585910dd8d6de715bed5e8734cb43cefe3d536a5d85453b2647fd684352ba50"
],
[
"e",
"f1c2a6cd4e853d1a51ffed601a7c9c1acda13b595880d801ccd664b4efe9955e",
"",
"root",
"c939453230b46fa56398c351c8e6fd0ed78ca8f4a6cce143256e35205ebf01af"
],
[
"p",
"f2c70b8ca7b5a21f6aff975b2517e97e4fc45331fbcac750392acfc983246e25"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://bemrose.social/objects/6a9a254a-3c63-4404-a199-45146c75789e",
"activitypub"
],
[
"L",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"l",
"pink.momostr.activitypub:https://bemrose.social/objects/6a9a254a-3c63-4404-a199-45146c75789e",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"-"
]
],
"content": "*sigh*\r\n\r\nIn a purely causal, definitional sense, you are correct. There is not absolute certainty. In real life, that simply doesn't happen. **That standard is reserved for pure logic and mathematical proofs.** So if that's your standard of proof, then you will never elect anyone. You will never convict a criminal. **You will never know anything. EVER.**\r\n\r\nHowever, in this thread, you yourself have used the phrase \"**beyond a reasonable doubt**\". *That standard has been met.* I've already shown you the numbers which prove that the bounds of uncertainty are so close to zero as to be indistinguishable from absolute certainty within our ability to measure. It is far, far, far beyond any standard of \"reasonable doubt\" that a fair justice system requires.\r\n\r\nYou ignored those numbers, and spewed some ignorant talking point about \"statistics != proof\". Clearly, you doubt the numbers, which tells me that you don't understand the numbers, but the fact remains. **Your doubt is not reasonable.** The standard has been met.\r\n\r\nnostr:npub1r3h9hguc4vhvfyedjwf4fqs4j66q6c0m78vggzdqf6550etgldvq2m7lk9 nostr:npub1eyu52v3sk3h62cuccdgu3ehapmtce2855mxwzse9dc6jqh4lqxhsrz43gw nostr:npub17trshr98kk3p76hljadj29lf0e8ug5e3l09vw5pe9t8unqeydcjsyq9dsg",
"sig": "90ff51e9490574cfa8a65be053d276b265e054f8f5c04981d17e5afb444c1e21a6f980c29b83e0d57f896109bd0c451f8f8598cb13b45c5a7fe6e33de2a9bdf1"
}