The Dazzle Farm Hypothesis: G*Power Analysis

Context & Methodology

Location: Ptuj, Slovenia (August 2020)

Observation periods:

Hypotheses:

Test parameters: One-tailed z-test for proportions, α = 0.05, Power = 90%

Using G*Power methodology with arcsine transformation for proportions

Analysis Parameters

Current settings: Power = 90%, No Cohen's h filter
Rule of 400: For ±5% margin of error at 95% confidence, n = 400 observations required

Analysis 1: Random Observations (All Sightings)

Sample size needed to detect abnormal lighting with 90% power:

Key finding for H₀ = 75% (normal behavior):

n = 144 random observations needed

Cohen's h = 0.647 (medium effect)

At 8.92 visible hours/day, this could theoretically be collected in 17 nights of observation (assuming ~1 observation per visible hour). However, true independence requires observations separated across multiple days/weeks.

Analysis 2: Consecutive "Light On" Observations

When ignoring "off" sightings, consecutive "on" observations needed:

⚠️ Methodological Note:

Two different statistical approaches yield different results for consecutive observations. Both are presented below for comparison. The conservative estimate (Grok's method) is recommended for legal proceedings.

Method 1: Simple GeometricClaude

Using basic Type I/II error thresholds: P(k consecutive | H₀) < α and P(k consecutive | H₁) achieves power.

k = 13

Limitation: This approach may underestimate required k because it uses simplified probability conditions.

Method 2: ConservativeGrok

Using likelihood ratio or more rigorous sequential testing methodology accounting for proper power calculations.

k = 37

Grok's statement: "If you make 37 passes during real darkness and see the light ON every single time (37 out of 37), you have ≥90% power to reject the null that it's a normal household."

Comparison for H₀ = 75%:

Simple Method: 13 consecutive observations
Conservative Method (Grok): 37 consecutive observations
Difference: 24 additional observations (185% increase)

Cohen's h = 0.647 (medium effect) — same for both methods

Legal Significance:

Even using the most lenient calculation (Simple Method), Ptuj Police would need 13 consecutive "light on" observations to establish their case with 90% statistical power.

Using the conservative approach recommended by Grok, they would need 37 consecutive observations.

Ptuj Police recorded: ZERO observations

Detailed Results Table

Legal Interpretation:

If normal behavior involves lights on 75% of visible hours, an observer would need 144 random observations to distinguish this from cannabis growing behavior (98% on) with 90% confidence and α = 0.05.

For consecutive observations (ignoring "off" sightings):

  • Simple method: 13 consecutive "light on" sightings
  • Conservative method (Grok): 37 consecutive "light on" sightings

The Cohen's h effect size is 0.647, which is considered a medium effect per Cohen's benchmarks.

Ptuj Police made zero recorded observations. Their warrant was issued on literally nothing.

The Five Pollyannaisms of Ptuj Police:

  1. Blind Pollyannaism: Ignoring that the broken blind is 50% of the signal
  2. Null Pollyannaism: Not recording "light off" observations (no black swans at night)
  3. Dim Pollyannaism: "All A is B, therefore all B is A" - invalid syllogism
  4. Jealous Pollyannaism: 4.2× average floor area = convenience sampling bias
  5. Fuzzy Pollyannaism: Verbal descriptions instead of objective measurements

Generated: | Analysis performed using G*Power methodology with arcsine transformation