Ok so I took a test today and they gave me zero training on the subject.
So by the last part of the test I just didn’t even read the questions and just chose whatever answers the voice in my head told me to pick.
Voice in my head gauranteed they’d be right.
So tomorrow we will verify.
If the last 4 questions of the test are right, I have magical powers.
If over 2 of them are wrong, then the voice in my head is a liar. We will see.
Such a test must be conducted at least 3 times in order to get even the tiniest bit of significant data. 
Predict a successful verification, because it has already been shown that there is significant variation in testing in cases like this, as the number of tries is increased.
Nah. There is a 1/256 chance of getting all 4 questions right. So if they are all right, it obviously ain’t chance.
1/41/41/4*1/4 = 1/256 chance
Sorry to be a pain, but if there is even 1/1,000,000 chance, it is meaningless (scientifically speaking).
No.
It’s like, if a voice in my head tells me an asteroid will hit the effiel tower 1 year from now, and one year from now it hits the effiel tower, which is like a 1/1 million chance, it is scientifically not meaningless.
Well, I’ll give you that. But you were not speaking of an event THAT unlikely.
Look, there’s no way in heck I got those answers right on those test without magic powers. They were extremely esoteric questions and I didn’t even bother to read them.
Put it this way, if I got the questions right there is a 255/256 chance I have magic powers.
In other words, Trixie… you were trying to wing it.
Don’t know what you mean by that. In essence i turned off my targetting computer and used the Force.
“Wing it” is an understatement, I didn’t even read the questions and the answers were just a bunch of technical jargon.
All that means is that you “flip a coin”.
And when you merely “flip a coin”, you might get it right. But to know that you got it right by more than merely statistical probability, you have to experience it beyond mere statistical probability. And once isn’t enough for merely flipping a coin. Statistics requires multiple trials.
That sounds familiar 
lol.
Did you have a vague Idea of the answers, or none at all? none being not good.
Wasn’t flipping a coin. Flipping a coin is 1/2 odds.
Essentially what I am doing is flipping a coin 128 times and it landing on the same side each time.
Hadn’t the vaguest idea of the answers, only the voice in my head was very clear which answer was the right answer, so I circled them without reading the answers.
The test hasn’t been graded yet, so we gotta wait 2 weeks for the answer to this. If they lose the test or don’t grade it I’m gonna be very pissed.
Statistical unlikeliness isn’t proof of “magic”.
Which is tantamount to saying, there is no proof. The demonstration of magic plays out on the same physical plane as the spiritual plane, if there is some credence to that.
Why not give credence to the notion to there is more to reality then what can be verified? To not to admit to that gives equally disturbing thoughts , such as, whatever there is, only exists if it can be verified.
The probability between the pros and cons of either argument is at least as tenuous as flipping a coin.
And binary logic supercedes the laws of chance, of interpreting probability demonstrations, and trying to interpret them. The reason for that is, if probability was based more then on a flip of the coin, and probability per verification could mean an interaction between physical and hidden dimensions, then a very gifted man or an evil genius the type Descartes described, could in fact cause vast destruction. But
This is not so, evil geniuses can not cause world wide catastrophe, only the destruction of their mind and life.
‘Those that God wishes to destroy, first make mad’.
".
Seems we have some neighhhsayers in the audience.
Yes we must distinguish two separate principles: 1. Rational skepticism and 2. The Unknown. It is both the case, at the same time, that we should exercise rational limitation of our beliefs as well as exercise openness to possibility and the presently unknown-unverifiable.
The fact that these two separate principles are both true is confusing for most people. Most people want to establish a mutual exclusivity between them, but that isn’t the case at all. In fact, ideally, the two principles would work together and support one another.
But regardless of that, believing in magic simply because something unlikely happened is stupid. But it would also be stupid to claim that “magic” (something presents unknown-unverifiable) is never the case or that extreme statistical unlikelihood doesn’t at least open up a possibility for what can be called “magic”.
If such a possibility occurs to you, that is a sign for further investigation, and not a sign to simply be converted into a “believer”.