It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Something is Happening :: Global Consciousness Project

page: 4
105
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 03:43 PM
link   
This is fairly interesting, it has been at dark blue for a while. Which is supposedly impossible mathematically. But these numbers could just as easily be influenced by something other than just consciousness.
Anyway what is going to happen?
Economic Collapse, Iran, "Terrorist" attack, something good maybe?

Interesting thread.




posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by jtma508
 


Originally posted by jtma508
I keep an eye on the GCP every day so I'm used to seeing the various patterns that play out from day-to-day. Recently it's been showing an unnaturally large spans of high and very high network variance (which suggests an unusually strong universal 'coherence of thought'). [..]


I apologise if this has been discussed already, I only skimmed the thread - there is one thing I do not understand about the interpretation of variance.

Interpreting significantly small variance as a kind of coherence seems logical to me, since whatever is influencing the random number generator (could not find GCP's random number generator type fast enough for this post - thermal noise? photoelectric effect?) is influencing the numbers in one direction, presumably (as it could be the random itself being not-so-random, which happens to be an aspect of randomness).

But why does GCP suggest that a significantly high network variance translates to a "broadly shared coherence of thought and emotion"? To me, variance is an indication of the opposite of coherence. As such, it could still fit with coherence of emotion; but only those emotions creating chaos, like anxiety. How does GCP make the link between coherent thoughts and increased variability?

Thanks!



[edit on 16-7-2010 by scraze]



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 03:52 PM
link   
There are videos on youtube explaining this phenomenom including interview the inventor. Donno where just give a search... I saw it last year in german.

they also show the data one day before 9/11 increasing very high and also at other events...


Peace love and light,
let u guide by higher i


Jim



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   
noosphere.princeton.edu...

9/11 Graph for all interested.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
This should help explain the GCP and why having consistent variance is such an interesting phenomenom:

When flipping a single coin, it is possible and very likely that there will be variances on how many times a certain side comes up in a row, it will not constantly consistently switch between heads and tails, you may have a bunch of heads in a row for example. If the GCP measured one these random devices it would be normal to have fluctuations that were not in the middle.

However, if you have say 50 coins (I'm not sure exactly how many random machines this project uses), and you flip all of them at the same time, they will still have random variances, but because of the amount of coins, the variances should almost always cancel eachother out, meaning that you should always have about the same amount of heads and tails come up. This is how the GCP works.

The GCP measures when this expected random variability is not cancelling itself out, and the majority of the 'coins' are coming up on the same side, which statistically should rarely happen, and definately not happen consistently.

For this reason, when this does occur, the idea is that some external force must be causing all the 'coins' to be acting cohesively and interfering with the expected randomnes.

When this cohesiveness does occur consistently, which the GCP chart seems to be suggesting is going on right now ( the line of blue down at the bottom) as apposed to fluctuating normally, it is really quite remarkable and interesting because mathematically this should not happen.

EDIT: although this explains the basic concept behind the project, I admit that I still dont understand how the blue and red colors are different in regards to this process. I would greatly appreciate it if someone could explain to me how variances from the expected translate to these.

[edit on 17-7-2010 by beansanmash]



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by createnice
This is how and why, good people, the mind can change the world. The personal mind can change your life by your intentions, focus and desire, the collective mind can change any circumstances of the world.


Meh. I know this is HIGHLY unpopular to say on threads like this, but there is a lot more going on than our "intents and focus and thoughts" making things happen.

For one thing. The data on 9-11 began to show some significance before the event, rather than just a explosion of activity afterward. Did we all cause 9-11 by intending it? Thinking about it? It seemed to me we were caught very much "intentionally" off guard. Thoughts and beliefs did not cause computer systems to fail on New Years Eve 2000, and Jesus isnt here yet, despite the many times large groups have had collective beliefs and thoughts that "this is it."


Originally posted by createnice
For the artists out there, look how we start with a blank page. All Creativity starts with a feeling, a desirable outcome, and intention.


Many of the truly brilliant do NOT claim it is their intent, but rather than somehow it flows into them, appears fully formed, and that openness to, or lack of intent is more important. Mozart claimed the music just came into his head, and he just wrote it down, he heard it, already existent, he didnt intentionally create it.


Originally posted by createnice
There is a catch here, You cannot desire, visualize and intend for one thing and think another. No doubts nor fears allowed.


There IS a catch here. For some odd reason, the truly delusional who believe and think they can fly, and intentionally without fear step off buildings universally plummet to the ground.

Its not that I dont think there is something to consciousness and happenings. But that I think the New Age versions are pretty dumbed down, a bit self (ego) centered, and clearly do not reliably and demonstrably work. It is very convenient that every failure can be brushed off as incomplete belief, trust, etc. And that every success can be retrospectively attributed to a strong belief, but we have no reliable predictive ability.

Im very glad I dont have to see all the "negative stars" I know a post like this would get in a thread like this.


Originally posted by createnice
Love you all.


Love light and peace be upon you too.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
When you put a thing in order, and give it a name, and you are all in accord, it becomes.

- - From the Navajo, Masked Gods, Waters, 1950



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by time91
 



It just shot to red. Maybe we can concentrate it back to blue.

That was something I found interesting, which might suggest that individuals COULD affect it, and that its NOT a Gaia mind. They noted during some solar eclipse that they only got significance from eggs that were local to the eclipse. When they looked at the readings from all the eggs, aggregated, it didnt look significant. But when they sorted out the eggs in the path of the eclipse, there it was.

So perhaps small groups could make an impact on the readings.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Hey fellow members, i know you want to discuss this but if you really want to change something, then help us to bring this thread up to the top.
We need as much coverage as possible. It is weekend so there are the most members on. Maybe we could trigger a tiny bit and also get some people to contribute. This is important! This has nothing to do with personal intentions GAYA NEEDS YOU!


Again here is the thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Peace, love and light,
let u guide by higher i

Jim



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Re 9/11 - don't know, but what all the 'sages' say (I don't mean the New Agers, here, but the recognised outstanding spiritual teachers of all persuasions, over centuries) is that we are not separate...so what one person thinks does have an effect on everyone.

Based on that 'theory', it could be showing us exactly that. There must have been a high level of energy, stress, anxiety, etc in the minds of all those who were involved planningthe attack, especially given the huge magnitude of what they were anticipating - whomever they were - and maybe we all picked up on that. It was a defining moment in recent history of huge significance, which those with fore-knowledge knew very well. On a subliminal level perhaps we picked up on all that?

Personally, I believe that is very possible.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by jtma508
reply to post by mutantgenius
 


I'll give you a very basic explanation. A rather large number of electronic devices are scattered all over the world and connected to the servers at Princeton University. These devices are call REG's (random event generators). They are electronic circuits that randomly generate 0's and 1's and are SUPPOSED to be completely immune from outside effects (these devices are normally used to do electronic testing).

In the earliest stages of the GCP (back in the 80s) it was found in laboratory experiments that people could statistically change the output of the device by concentrating on it. So, the originators of the projects decided to pepper these devices all over the world to see if they could pick up the same sort of global changes in thought energy (for lack of a better term). Statistically, any significant change in the collective output of these devices should be impossible. But clearly, it happens with regularity. If you read through their site you'll read about correlations to several major world events.


yes, it sort of works

schrodingers dead cat theory

works with electrons too, if you observe them they travel in a straight line, if you dont they scatter, mind over matter. the mind boggles at this strange universe



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Let's all feel good together and listen to this




posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Well, the movie Inception was just released. For me it did spark thoughts of being more connected to everyone than we realize. Right when the movie ended, the entire IMAX theatre audience was silent for a good 10-15 seconds. Who knows though if a movie like this can trigger something like that. All I know is that it definitely was mind-opening.
Perhaps this movie caused some sort of awareness to shape up in the viewer?



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:34 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
It just shot to red. Maybe we can concentrate it back to blue.


I don't think so. Blue means more random. Wouldn't wanting it to do anything interfere with the randomization, assuming it's some sort of mass consciousness causing the effect?


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 


Correct. We need to aim for red.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


I dont discount what the sages have said, to be honest. I consider it all. I just dont have enough data to make the kind of decisive statements some who write New Age books like to.

After all, some of history's greatest mystics also seem to indicate that there is no duality, and that the universe is something perfect and unchanging, which has very specific impacts on ideas such as us "creating" anything or even having "free will" at all. Even some physicists are questioning time, and other things that would seem to be required for cause and effect as we know it.

Again, I am not saying I have no interest in, or that I discredit entirely these lines of thought. I am VERY interested in them. I am very curious as to how consciousness works, and why we see what we see, and whether or not it is "real" or illusory. So much so I dropped out of what would have been a lucrative career path for philosophy, which is almost universally scorned as worthless. Lol.

I want to know too. And I think there is something to the idea of a collective unconscious, and a "Oneness." (From personal subjective experience which is possibly flawed and delusional) I sense that there is. But I also sense that none of us understand it enough to be speaking authoritatively on it, or writing manuals on its use. (The "Secret.")

I dont disagree that there is the possibility that the consciousnesses of the bombers themselves could have been impacting the readings before the masses knew. It is entirely possible. But that also means that the consciousness of the "sages" should be having a similar impact when they exercise their will and intent, and we dont see that, universally. Which could mean we have none or very few real contemporary sages, or it could mean the whole thing is operating in a way we dont yet understand.

I dont know for certain. Nor do I claim to. But I do feel pretty darn certain it isnt just as easy as focus, intent and belief. Those things dont universally work, and that suggests they are not causes.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 



Ok, my brain hurts. Could someone please explain the green blue and red in slightly different terminology than that on the site? Cause clearly, I dont understand.

I thought, (wrongly, apparently) that red was one form of "out of the norm" and blue was another form of "out of the norm" and that green was normal variation. So, I was assuming that while they were drawing distinctions between "broadly shared/ deeply shared" that both ends of the spectrum indicated significant deviance from normal random occurrence. (Green)

Where am I going wrong? Lol. Help.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeahright


Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
It just shot to red. Maybe we can concentrate it back to blue.


I don't think so. Blue means more random. Wouldn't wanting it to do anything interfere with the randomization, assuming it's some sort of mass consciousness causing the effect?


Nope, don't think so. The whole idea behind the project is that the interuptions in the random REG/RNG data stream are caused by a collective sub-conscious that personally we are not aware of.

I know that the original experiments were based upon people deliberately attempting to influence singular devices but I'm not sure thats the case when looking at the global system.

The whole idea is that the mass consciousness has an ability to forsee the future without knowing and thus influences the devices.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Wow this thing is now way off the charts...I looked at it this morning and now it is way off the charts in the opposite direction. I hope this is an indicator society is ready for a new way forward. I certainly have been feeling it. Maybe it's really taking hold.


IT IS NOW CHANGING. WE ARE CHANGING. WE ARE TRANSFORMING OURSELVES IN ORDER TO BRING THROUGH THESE CHANGES TO OUR PLANET. THE PLAN IS WORKING. IT IS HAPPENING NOW. THE TIME IS NOW.


-Blossom Goodchild



Way-showers of earth... your moment of power is now.

Source

-Lauren C. Gorgo

If you are into this type of confirmation...




top topics



 
105
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join