>>12547459Yes, sounds like meaningless gibberish, just like most claims about probabilities. People don't realize how fragile the whole subject is.
I refuse to consider any statements about probabilities as meaningful unless they come as a precise statement in completely mathematical language about measure spaces with no mention of likelihood, or if they're formulated in a way that's easy to make an algorithm to simulate the probability empirically and check its value.
Since your claim is neither, it's meaningless.
