originally posted by: 3n19m470
originally posted by: james1947
originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
a reply to: james1947
There's a whole chapter in the book I recommended tying together that incident with known Mkultra hypnotists.
Here's the problem with that...before 1992 some of the stars on Betty's map were unknown to astronomers (science)...and thus could not be any part of
an "implanted memory", or some Mkultra thing.
That is fascinating. What do the debunkers say? Coincidence?
On the subject of the "unknown at the time" stars; that is typically ignored, kind of like they don't even exist.
As for the rest: Coincidence. the problem is that the probability of coincidence is very, very small: 5.84795e-87 ... almost non-existant.
But apparently it is all "old hat", and new data (modern astrometrics) doesn't matter, the errors of some "astronomers" in the early 90's are just
fine, and we don't need to correct the glaring errors made...like two stars moving "too far away" when their position is calculated with modern
data...except, that is wholly untrue. Most of the other statements made by these "astronomers" is also wrong, like the nature of binary stars...they
can actually have planetary systems, frequently also viable for advanced life.
My "thing" is that the map has been misrepresented by science, astronomers, astrophysicists, etc. and truly does show what could be considered a
"trade and exploration map", that shows "stars and planets".
Debunkers have mostly concentrated on other details of the event, like the use of hypnosis. While that may be cause to take the overall story with a
Siberian Salt Mine, it in no way can affect the mathematical probabilities of the map. That probability is determined by the number of stars that can
be said to be a match vs the number of stars within a specific radius of Sol (Earth), and that is fixed, and completely independent of the actual
Then there are the stars themselves; every star on the map is capable of supporting advanced life i.e. they are all "hot" K class, G class, or "cold"
F class. (these are not stars that were "pre-selected" because they are suitable, but rather the stars that "didn't exist" before 1992).
One of the things I don't quite understand is; Why most people are willing to accept old, obsolete, and now invalid data over modern, far more
accurate and relevant data.