posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 10:27 PM
I also want to touch on my thoughts on the nature of prediction, prophecy, and paranoia.
Every 10-20 years, the public seems to be fixed on a certain date that, gossip is sure, heralds the inevitable end of the world. There were tons of
them in the 20th century, and of course the year 2000 itself, even a few between 2000 and now, and of course the current one, 2012, based on an
obscure interpretation of the fact that the Aztec astrological calendar ends on that year.
I want to express my logical analysis of prophecy.
Nostradamus will be my example here. Nostradamus was a supposed prophet who wrote quatrains that predicted future events, as most of you, being on
ATS, probably know. However, the problem with Nostradamus is that his prophecies are all extremely vague. They may contain rather specific names,
numbers, and references to places and eras, but since there are a lot of cryptic metaphors he uses (cryptic to us in this day and age) and since his
prophecies are based on observations of times far ahead of his level of comprehension of technology (assuming he actually saw the future), it would be
nigh impossible to use Nostradamus' works as a definitive guidebook to major future events. Not ONCE has Nostradamus EVER predicted an event BEFORE
it occurred, that is to say, never has anyone ever taken a Nostradamus quatrain and used it to acknowledge a future event BEFORE it happened. Rather,
people have interpreted his writings AFTER major events as prophecies of those events, with sometimes admittedly chilling coincidence, or in most
cases, rather contrived comparison.
So we can say that Nostrodamus' works, even if they all represent accurate prophetic data, are unreliable data because they cannot be reliably used
to predict future events BEFORE they occur (so that we could prevent or prepare for them). All data supports this idea.
So if we look at bodies of evidence, such as ancient, obscure belief systems/writings/records/prophecies, and fit them to major events in history
after the fact, we cannot say those are reliable sources of future prediction either, because they fail to actually predict.
I bring this up to tie into end of the world theories, such as the 2012 looming disaster that we assuredly all face.
Now, on the other hand, if we had a body of evidence that actually DID predict a future event, such as a bunch of news reports, some ancient prophecy,
or Edgar Cacey's sister's uncle's fingerpaintings, we would not be able to know that the prediction is accurate until it comes true, and only if we
make a prediction based off of the prophecy that actually comes true before it happens. Now, if we DID, we could still write this off as coincidence
unless the evidence was too clear or obvious.
What I'm slowly and painstakingly getting at here, is that we shouldn't jump to conclusions about international affairs and conspiracies unless
something concrete actually happens. So far our only concrete data that the government(s) are plotting anything malignant for their people (I'm
referring to the western governments) has been the creeping and increasing denial of civil liberties in the name of wartime security/terrorism
prevention etc. Other than that, nothing other than oil greed conspiracy has anything other than circumstantial evidence backing it. So what I'm here
to say is, if you have a preconceived notion about the government, try your best to be conscious of the fact that you need to stay objective in order
to see the big picture clearly. If you do that, you will not likely get emotionally distressed at events in the news media that appear to be pointing
to a looming disaster caused by an evil regime. If something DOES happen however, that's when I want to see all the news clips being brought out,
major discussions, and plans for action, because then we could look back at the signs and piece together what as a national community we should do