>>45740832>What is confirmation bias>What is Pareidolia >What is assuming the conclusion>What is apophenia>What is patternicity>What is burden of proofWe can test against all those with probability.
What are the odds they are not influenced by the zodiac?
Let's say there are 1000 animals in the world
- 12 perfect-zodiac animals
- 988 not-zodiac animals
It's undisputable that we have Dragon, Chicken, Monkey, Pig, Tiger and Rabbit
Anyone trying to argue against them is taking the piss and not worth a second of our time.
That means the odds of 6 hits and 2 misses are:
8C6 x (12/1000)^6 x (988/1000)^2 = 0.00000000008%
Therefore it's almost undeniable even if you concede 2 misses.
However, a closer look at the "misses" reveals the following:
Despite being the one that looks the least like what you would expect
>Cyndaquil is literally nezumi>nezumi is the exact word for the Zodiac animal in Japan>Cyndaquil is featured in Zodiac year of the rat merchandise... both in 2008 and 2020So with Rat being an almost-undeniable hit, the only remaining stretch is to assume that they used a Fox as a Dog. Not a big stretch.
Then again, it doesn't even matter what you think about about Rat and Dog, since the odds are still 99.99999999992% even if they had been perfect misses.
