Rubber band demo; agreements

[from Gary Cziko 951112.1610 GMT responding to Bruce Abbott (951112.1015 EST)]

I'd say it's a good bet that 100% of the variance in Y is accounted for by
variance in Y. (;->

Don't be so sure. Although you knew I meant X with Y, we can get some
pretty strange results when we analyze behavior from a PCT perspective.

A dowsing rod may be a fine way to locate water if it followed up by a
geological study and other reliable methods. But then why bother with the
dowsing rod?--Gary

Gary, Gary, Gary. I was with you right up to there, and then you had to go
and ruin it. After agreeing that standard experimental methods are useful
at some stage in the investigation, what do you offer as your stand-in for
these standard methods? Pseudoscience. I would restate your example this way:

A geological study may be a fine way to to locate places where water is
likely to be found, but to prove that there's water there, you have to drill.

Yes, your drilling is much better than my dowsing rod. I was trying to
think of some clever way to end my post, added the nonsense about the
dowsing rod, then was pressured by my wife to get moving to a dinner party
and so sent it prematurely. So just imagine it wasn't there and so you do
end up agreeing with me. And since Rick also agrees with me, then you must
agree with Rick and Rick with you. But I suspect that Rick won't find that

We'll soon find out.--Gary