Critical need by 8/31:   $10,000 to cover a crippling immediate shortfall.   $7,430 to go.   Please help now!
Click here to advertise on

numbers game

By Diogenes (articles ) | Mar 09, 2007

If you followed the news coverage of the Discovery Channel special, "The Lost Tomb of Jesus," you know that the producers cited a statistical analysis, claiming that there was only an infinitesimal probability that another Jewish family tomb would show the same names as the ones found in what was allegedly the tomb of Jesus' family. You might have wondered how those statistics were calculated.

The "Numbers Guy" in the Wall Street Journal wondered, too. So he contacted the University of Toronto statistician who furnished the figures. It turns out that-- surprise!-- the statistician began his calculations with the assumptions that the filmmakers gave him: that "Mariamene" was an unusual name referring to Mary Magdalen, rather than a variation on the very common "Mary;" that "Yose" was an unusual name rather than a form of the popular "Yosef;" and so on. Without those assumptions, the connection between this tomb in Jerusalem and the family of Jesus would have been "statistically not significant."

"When I was doing the calculation, I was naively unaware of the extent to which the filmmakers might be depending on the ultimate result of it," the Toronto professor told the Journal. "I did carry out the calculation in every good faith."

In short, the calculations were accurate. The data that went into the calculations... Well, you know the old principle of data analysis by computers: Garbage in, garbage out.

An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:

Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!

Our Spring Challenge Grant
Progress toward our Spring Challenge Grant goal ($17,744 to go):
$35,000.00 $17,256.18
51% 49%
Sound Off! supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 5 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: - Mar. 09, 2007 6:34 PM ET USA

    I heard Fr Mitch Pacwa this week citing Chesterton's remark about statistics: some people use stats pretty much like a drunk on the streets would use a lamp-post - for support, not for illumination.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 09, 2007 5:54 PM ET USA

    It proves another axiom: Figures can lie and liars can figure.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 09, 2007 11:58 AM ET USA

    An article on all this in the Canadian newsmagazine Macleans made it sound like he was an integral "team member", but he described his methodology and I thought, either this guy is an "ideological" mathematician (really, "mathematician"), or else he isn't as "integral" as he's been painted (and is being used). 'Cause if he'd been an integral team member, he'd have known more about the names . . . People wouldn't be nearly as swindled by stuff like this if they read, e.g., Josephus.

  • Posted by: - Mar. 09, 2007 11:48 AM ET USA

    You mean the left would fudge data!

  • Posted by: - Mar. 09, 2007 9:02 AM ET USA

    Garbage In, Garbage Out: It works for ICEL.

Subscribe for free
Shop Amazon
Click here to advertise on

Recent Catholic Commentary

No, the Pope did not endorse a gay-friendly children's book 0 hours ago
Legal pressure does not make sterilization moral 21 hours ago
Just as you suspected, most polls are useless. August 26
Intrinsic evil can't be evaluated on a case-by-case basis August 26
'Catholicism by osmosis is dead'—Weigel hits the nail on the head August 26

Top Catholic News

Most Important Stories of the Last 30 Days
Pope Francis: welcome with compassion those who have remarried outside the Church CWN - August 5