“The computer model is predicting that 87.7% of computer models are wrong,” said Dr. Emile Fragua, Chief of Computerized Computer Prediction at the University of East Anglia.
“That’s exaggerated,” Fragua mumbled to himself, grabbing another corn dog from the Corn Dog Waffel Stick Maker he’d installed in the lab as the quarantine took effect.
Then he restarted the simulation for the 362nd time, and picked up the new edition of Computer Simulation Journal.
- Computer Models Predict Scientists Extinct by 2025
- University of East Anglia Claims Imperial College Computer Model of Coronavirus Deaths Inferior Because ‘It’s Just a City College’
- WHO Borrows Doomsday Computer Models from IPCC
- Fight Breaks Out at Conference Between Climate Change and Virus Modelers Over Who is More Accurate
- Early Feminist Computer Model Predicted End of Men Photographing ‘Hot Women of Tech’
- Computer Models Failed to Predict Worldwide Phenomena of ‘Hot Women With Guns’ and ‘Video Reactions of Hot Chicks in Fast Cars’
Thinking about how his results could be so wrong, Fragua absent-mindedly flipped to the hot women of tech article before repressing his toxic masculinity and opting instead to find out just how inferior Imperial College was compared to his own university.
“As human beings advance in knowledge, we tend to shun the destructive, discriminatory superstitions of the past in favor of far more enlightened understandings obtained through the rigors of the scientific method,” he said to himself.
The simulation beeped before he could even find the article.
The readout out said 87.7% again. “Damn! Siri, what are the odds of a computer model predicting the exact same results 362 times in a row?” Fragua asked.
“I found this on the web for what are the odds of a computer model predicting the exact same results 362 times in a row,” Siri responded.
“Screw it,” Fragua said, flipping to the article about hot women with guns.
