"The Signal And The Noise why so many predictions fail, but some don't" by Nate Silver {Edited for Repost}

              Nate Silver wrote this book on the use and misuse of statistical media, often leading to catastrophic failures of prediction.

              It's not fair for me to post a single recommended reading material on the important issue of statistical prognostication and not provide more information. There are big differences between different peoples approaches to making predictions. The technicalities of bias and error are profound and difficult. Much of what people believe is often obscured by so called "supporting evidence." The auspices were thought favorable.

              But mine is an ever closer walk with thee. In my work I have attempted to use the Mediums of Oracles and Spiritual Diagnostics Technologies as meta forms for these larger issues including personal bias and error. In much of statistics we must make educated guesses about the expected limits of prospective sampling. This very process of modeling from a search parameter directly effects outcome, regrettably. What I have tried to display is the way that MUTUALLY INCLUSIVE NEGATIVE DOUBLE OPINION BIASES {Mindob} guaranties that "Everybody is wrong." True believers want think I'm a cruel thug for smashing poor fairies wings under the callous gaze of my brutal heartlessness. And the so called "Rational" Positivists insist that I must either be ignorant or insane, and then therefore must be dangerously corrupt. Everybody is wrong in this situation. History is cluttered with the waste caused by powerful peoples insistence on believing their own biased spin, simply by misusing these sophisticated ancient spiritual technologies. It's not that the meta formally designed modelings are to be immune to misuse from misinterpretation. These diagnostic mapping systems simply provide elegantly comparative insights into the otherwise random occurrences in life and in nature in general. These models have been progressively incorporated into our daily living cultures. But because hindsight is golden, we must always be prepared to reinsert the results of our processing errors back into our searches in expectation of rechecking for probable error. I won't go into a lot of detail about our fortunate academic return to the superior "Bayesian" statistical reasoning math. But in the art of making statistical projections, we are encouraged to include analysis of our previous results into guessing, weighing the results of our projections of into each next inquiry. Hence an accounting for a diminishing spiral of error.