**ahem** (in Jon Stewart voice) Nailed it!

It's amazing to me how hard it is for people to understand the difference between random and chaotic.

i have to say, i disagree with all of the "hosts" sentiments. their respective final decisions about the theory are non-derivative of their final remarks. both the spiraling of a conversation and the flocking of birds are governed by separate-but-related phenoms, which the guest clearly states in his talk. yet these are the points upon which the first two hosts hinge their vote of theory confirmation. and the quite eloquent statement by the host next to the guest(despite his lack of contribution earlier in the show), which i happen to agree with-namely that all things may in fact be chaotic and that it is our finite knowledge that deems them random- does not fit with his ultimate denial of the chaos theory.

i find the most educational portion of this interview to be the affirmed lack of rational decision-making by the majority of speakers involved.

>> ^E_Nygma:

i have to say, i disagree with all of the "hosts" sentiments. their respective final decisions about the theory are non-derivative of their final remarks. both the spiraling of a conversation and the flocking of birds are governed by separate-but-related phenoms, which the guest clearly states in his talk. yet these are the points upon which the first two hosts hinge their vote of theory confirmation. and the quite eloquent statement by the host next to the guest(despite his lack of contribution earlier in the show), which i happen to agree with-namely that all things may in fact be chaotic and that it is our finite knowledge that deems them random- does not fit with his ultimate denial of the chaos theory.
i find the most educational portion of this interview to be the affirmed lack of rational decision-making by the majority of speakers involved.


They aren't denying chaos theory? Wasn't he, rather, explaining that there is no such thing as a random system, but a complex one? Not sure what you are getting at exactly.

^ @GeeSussFreeK: yeah, i meant the "theory that he talks about concerning chaos wherein chaotic systems have an underlying order and are not in fact random" and not the full blown "Chaos Theory." i just feel the hosts agree or disagree with the guest's presented theory based on a flawed understanding of related ideas or misinterpreted data.