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.

 

Post here to debunk Timewave Zero theory

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by theursprachist
 


Hmmm.

I understand your annoyance and I recognize that the lack of a consistent criterion has hindered Timewave research until now. If you read my previous posts, you'll notice that I put forth genetic novelty as the only kind of novelty measured by the Wave. Therefore, I start by saying that its novelty happens only under procreation.

But sexual reproduction does not lead to new genes, only the mixing of genes. You specifically state procreation and not mutations or new genes.


Genetic novelty does not mean mutation or new genes. Genetic novelty means that the offspring has a genome very different from each one of his parents, which also means that the parents have a genome very different from each other.



This method will work for the years before the start of genetic engineering.

Why would that be necessary. There are billions of people not involved in genetic engineering. What influence could that have today?


The Wave measures genetic novelty, not the "influence" of this novelty on any other realm, no matter if it happens with billions of people or inside a lab.



For instance, McKenna points out a resonance between Ancient Egypt and Nazi Germany. Notice that both civilizations had similar effects on the migration of Jews.

This is a non-starter. There were never any large number of Hebrews in ancient Egypt. There was never any Exodus.


I agree with you. I haven't noticed that the controversy surrounding the Exodus would render the resonance useless for our purposes of testing the Wave.
edit on 16-6-2011 by theursprachist because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by theursprachist
 



Genetic novelty does not mean mutation or new genes. Genetic novelty means that the offspring has a genome very different from each one of his parents, which also means that the parents have a genome very different from each other.

This sounds rather contrived since the genotype is not the phenotype.


The Wave measures genetic novelty, not the "influence" of this novelty on any other realm, no matter if it happens with billions of people or inside a lab.

Are you actually claiming that this measures some concept that is not measurable since it involves only humans and possibly very few at that? Are you claiming that this is more likely to measure still births due to genetic abnormalities, and Downs, and other genetic issues?

Exodus did not happen. There was no migration of Hebrews out of Egypt. McKenna, if he made this claim, based his idea on bad info.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by theursprachist
 



Genetic novelty does not mean mutation or new genes. Genetic novelty means that the offspring has a genome very different from each one of his parents, which also means that the parents have a genome very different from each other.

This sounds rather contrived since the genotype is not the phenotype.


I did not use the term phenotype and I do not see genotype and phenotype as interchangeable terms. I say that the phenotype reflects the genotype. If two groups do not mate for centuries, obviously not only their phenotypes but also their genotypes will become different.



The Wave measures genetic novelty, not the "influence" of this novelty on any other realm, no matter if it happens with billions of people or inside a lab.

Are you actually claiming that this measures some concept that is not measurable since it involves only humans and possibly very few at that?


No.
You may measure genetic novelty due to genetic engineering by comparing the genomes of both parents. The less they match each other, the more of a novel event the procreation will become. Obviously, genetically engineered parents may have less in common than natural ones. Hence, some moments in genetic engineering make a bigger impact on the Wave than new patterns of migration in humans.




Are you claiming that this is more likely to measure still births due to genetic abnormalities, and Downs, and other genetic issues?


No.
You may measure genetic novelty due to procreation by comparing the genomes of both parents.
If their offspring has suffered from dramatic genetic abnormalities, this will become a genetic novelty only if it procreates with others who have not gone through the same mutation. The genome of the offspring does not matter in terms of genetic novelty until it becomes a parent.
edit on 16-6-2011 by theursprachist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by theursprachist
 


I certainly am the one that brought up phenotype. I was interested in clarifying your position about whether the genetic make up or the expressed genes were of interest.


You may measure genetic novelty due to procreation by comparing the genomes of both parents.
If their offspring has suffered from dramatic genetic abnormalities, this will become a genetic novelty only if it procreates with others who have not gone through the same mutation. The genome of the offspring does not matter in terms of genetic novelty until it becomes a parent.

So if A and B have an offspring C, then C adds to novelty unless it is considered an abnormality? Then C is not considered unless C has a child, is that right?

Or is it that C is not considered until C has an offspring no matter if C has abnormalities or not?



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by theursprachist
 


You may measure genetic novelty due to procreation by comparing the genomes of both parents.
If their offspring has suffered from dramatic genetic abnormalities, this will become a genetic novelty only if it procreates with others who have not gone through the same mutation. The genome of the offspring does not matter in terms of genetic novelty until it becomes a parent.

So if A and B have an offspring C, then C adds to novelty unless it is considered an abnormality?


No.



Or is it that C is not considered until C has an offspring no matter if C has abnormalities or not?


Yes.
I'll try to put my main ideas exposed until now in a schematic way.

I. On Novelty.
1. A human genome is a sequence of 3,2 * 10^9 characters that have four possible values : A, C, G or T.
2. If A and B have an offspring C, then C starts a novel event if and only if C and D have an offspring E.
2.1.If C and D have an offspring E:
2.1.1.Then the novelty of the event started by C is the X number of places where C and D sequences are equal divided by 3,2 x 10^9.
2.1.1.1.1. If the X / 3,2 x 10^9 is more novel than any other events in the world at the same moment, then:
2.1.1.1.1.1. If X / 3,2 x 10^9 = 0, then 100% of novelty happened and the Wave will indicate zero.
2.1.1.1.1.2. If X / 3,2 x 10^9 = 1, then 0% of novelty happened and the Wave will indicate one.

II. On resonance.
1. If X happens before Y and if X / 3,2 x 10^9 = n (Y / 3,2 x 10^9) and if n = a * 6 + b * 64 and if a and b are natural numbers ( including zero ):
1.1. Then the moment when X happens resonates with the moment when Y happens.
edit on 18-6-2011 by theursprachist because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-6-2011 by theursprachist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 04:56 AM
link   
Now we are getting into some serious research
Very interested in seeing your formula applied to the wave Usurprachist.

Respect for making stereo sit up and listen. Condolences that he will find a minute spelling mistake or grammatical error and harp on about it for the next 10 pages. Like he did in the other thread, where his question about the fractal dimension has already been answered twice, but he comes into this thread and posts that it hasn't. Now who is the liar here?

Stereo does raise a good point though - where do mutation, viruses and other phenomena that affect a genotype fit into this? I guess its still included in your formula because it would just make more of the codons different. (Apologies if I get my terminology wrong, its been a few years since I studied DNA and I am quite rusty).



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Cecilofs
 



It resonates with the 2nd industrial revolution

You have no evidence for this claim other than the plot. You are shoehorning. You have no idea what a resonance is other than treating the plot as a holy book.


400,000 BC resonates with ~4300 BC, October 1914, June 10 2011.

You follow this with more shoehorning. It is just one "holy scripture" comment after another. This is the sort of ridiculous thing that people are calling TWZ evidence. It is not.


which makes it difficult to track the resonances forward.

This comment is an admittance that you are doing nothing more than shoehorning.


Hmmm so let me get this straight...you think we are shoehorning? Its just not very obvious when you say it 10 times in one post.

Ok so birth of agriculture vs 2nd industrial revolution - why is this not just shoehorning?. These events are thematically related and actually have a lot in common.

Both events involved:
- A novel idea by a person/group of people.
- A global change in consciousness of humans.
- A global change in behaviour of humans.
- A massive expansion of human populations due to increased food supply.
- A novel way to harness energy/increase the amount of energy available for humans to use.
- A change in how we communicate (Invention of writing -> Mass scale postage -> Information Communication Technology).
- Increased flow of goods, services and people themselves between populations.

How does this relate to our present situation?

Firstly, because Climate Change is directly linked to the Industrial Revolution because the revolution was all about mass producing the combustion engine and utilising it for our benefit. Climate Change is a direct result of increased CO2 emissions from combustion engines (If you believe popular opinion anyway). At the very least we can agree that we have reached an energy crisis on the planet and going forward, we need a novel way to harness and use energy and novel ways to distribute that energy to people (So some don't starve).

Secondly, because the way in which ICT has taken off in recent years and exploded very recently is an increase in the complexity and novelty of our communication systems. This is also directly and thematically linked to the invention of writing and again the increase in complexity/speed of communication due to the combustion engine.

The only other example I can think of in terms of harnessing energy is Nuclear power. But then look at the implications for the average person - very little besides those who use power from Nuclear power plants (which could be from coal anyway) or those adversely affected by radiation. Nuclear energy has had a big impact on the world, but in ways that are different to the birth of Agriculture and the combustion engine. e.g. Not everyone has a nuclear powered car. That then is why discoveries related to Nuclear Energy resonate with different time periods.

Meanwhile, you can't really go through and say "All storms are novel" because that's not true. The first storm is novel, all storms after that aren't (Unless it was caused by something different/has different components/behaviour/whatever). But then storms affect other things such as human civilisations and then that can be novel. Or it could be how people react to it that matters. I fully admit it is a slippery definition, so Usurp's idea about using genetic novelty is probably a good one, since its something solid to hold onto.


As for that last part, no that's not an admittance of shoehorning, its an admittance of the limits of the research and the theory. That's called transparency - something you don't seem to be a fan of.

If we had detailed information about the past then we could be more accurate. Do you know on what day and year fire was invented? Didn't think so.
edit on 20-6-2011 by Cecilofs because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-6-2011 by Cecilofs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Cecilofs
 



Respect for making stereo sit up and listen. Condolences that he will find a minute spelling mistake or grammatical error and harp on about it for the next 10 pages. Like he did in the other thread, where his question about the fractal dimension has already been answered twice, but he comes into this thread and posts that it hasn't. Now who is the liar here?


If you think that the fractal dimension is just a grammatical error or spelling mistake then you really have no idea what you are talking about.

The fractal dimension was given only by me and one other poster. That was after the "10 pages" of asking. So please do not try and misrepresent what is happening. Anyone can go there and see that you are not being truthful.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Cecilofs
 


The shoehorning is due to the fact that you are relating events based on the plot. You are simply treating the plot as correct and identifying events, often of vague dating, as being related because the plot says so.

That's not too hard to see is it?



Both events involved:
- A novel idea by a person/group of people.
- A global change in consciousness of humans.
- A global change in behaviour of humans.
- A massive expansion of human populations due to increased food supply.
- A novel way to harness energy/increase the amount of energy available for humans to use.
- A change in how we communicate (Invention of writing -> Mass scale postage -> Information Communication Technology).
- Increased flow of goods, services and people themselves between populations.


You act as if these events are novel and happened at specific times. These events happened over long periods of time. The events were not global. They were localized events that spread. There was no massive expansion in human populations, or maybe you want to show us links to allow us to see what you mean by massive. Here I am questioning the increase at the development of agriculture. You think that this was a novel way to harness energy? You think that this was invented at that time? You think that agriculture and the invention of writing happened at the same time?

You have the Industrial Revolution based on the heat engine? It began with water power and then moved onto the heat engine.

I think I get it. You are listing things from one place and not taking the time to see that related issues occurred at the other time.

All we are seeing here is assigning events to match the plot - shoehorning.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   
If one to were look at the people who back TWZ, then that would be all the debunking one required.

And to those who like to reference it.

This too shall come to pass.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
OK Ill have a crack


All the connections Ive seen between past and present events seem weak at best, normally its about 2 semi related incidents.

For example a fire happening in 2 years 60 years apart, Im pretty sure serious bushfires happen on a yearly basis.




MAY 2010, THAILANDIA CIVIL WAR and... 1847 MEXICAN- AMERICAN WAR...
JUNE 2010, KYRGIZ RIOTS and... 1850 TAIPING REBELLION
JULY 2010 WIKILEAKS and... INAUGURATION OF INTER-CONTINENTAL TELEGRAPH,
1858 JULY 2010 PAKISTAN FLOODS and... GRENOBLE FLOOD 1859


Now other than the general details what is it exactly that ties these together?

1st one, 1 is civil war 1 is international war. Both of which happen on a yearly basis
2nd one, 1 is a riot 1 is a rebellion, apart from mindless violence and bloodshed what do these 2 situations have in common, again these things happen all the time.
3rd one, I fail to see any connection at all

4th one, yep both floods but once again THEY HAPPEN EVERY YEAR!!!!!!!!!!

Without me going thru the timeline piece by piece can you give me some credible examples?
Preferably something along the lines of the whole Abraham Lincoln/JFK assasination coincidence thing, provide a few pieces of evidence like that and you can consider me a convert



im not too familiar with this subject but i've noticed the lines dont just go straight up and down. On any particular up or down motion there are hundered if not thousands of up and downs as the line eventually goes straight up or straight down. Maybe the tiny ups and downs that make up the big one ARE the little things that can be measured.

lol...IMO

people just look at the big line going up and down and not the tiny up and downs that make up the big one...



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 06:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologistYou act as if these events are novel and happened at specific times. These events happened over long periods of time. The events were not global. They were localized events that spread. There was no massive expansion in human populations, or maybe you want to show us links to allow us to see what you mean by massive. Here I am questioning the increase at the development of agriculture. You think that this was a novel way to harness energy? You think that this was invented at that time? You think that agriculture and the invention of writing happened at the same time?


Yes I think agriculture was novel. Prior to that humans were hunter-gatherers, with very limited cultivation techniques. They spent a good portion of their time foraging for food and hunting. Now we have sophisticated machines and techniques so that a small group of people can produce enough food for hundreds or thousands of others.

Writing and agriculture where invented around the same time. Again since we don't have exact dates for either invention and we are talking timespans of hundreds/thousands of years, it is difficult to pinpoint exact dates for the resonances, but I agree that these events took place over a period of time.

Over time both agriculture and engines (whether steam, wood, coal or whatever) let populations grow (perhaps "massive" wasn't warranted) and spread due to an increase in available energy. With agriculture it was because there was more food. With the 2nd Industrial Revolution it was because of ease of transporting heavy weights across vast distances (i.e. Trains).


I think I get it. You are listing things from one place and not taking the time to see that related issues occurred at the other time.

All we are seeing here is assigning events to match the plot - shoehorning.


Which related issues happened at which other time?

Ok so you can look at other thematically related things. That was just an example. Maybe things like nuclear energy, renewable energy, coal mining and see where they lay on the graph.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Cecilofs
 


So you say that agriculture is novel.
1. Agriculture did not happen at the same time everywhere
2. Planting did not happen at the same time as animal domestication
3. Animals happened at different times
4. Not all peoples turned to agriculture

As far as writing is concerned
1. Writing was invented in several places and not at the same time
2. Not every group of people invented writing
3. Early writing was not prose
4. Writing systems have been developed in recent times


Ok so you can look at other thematically related things. That was just an example. Maybe things like nuclear energy, renewable energy, coal mining and see where they lay on the graph.

You can't test TWZ that way. You end up shoehorning or making excuses to state why things in fact do not match the plot.

My claim is that 1890 is one of the defining years for the present. So how about it folks. Was 1890 a novel year or not?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   
If I were a TWZ fan I'd be making all sorts of noise that 1890 resonates with 1968. These years are so tightly linked through direct technological inventions that it is amazing.

No one has dared to address my claims. Why is that?



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
My claim is that 1890 is one of the defining years for the present. So how about it folks. Was 1890 a novel year or not?

If I were a TWZ fan I'd be making all sorts of noise that 1890 resonates with 1968. These years are so tightly linked through direct technological inventions that it is amazing.

No one has dared to address my claims. Why is that?


I already said I think 1890 was a novel year and a lot of what I've been posting about recently has been about it. Not sure why you are alluding to us disagreeing with you here.

So which inventions are you talking about? Space flight? Definately an interesting link. Also interesting that space flight is becoming commercial and accessible to the public very recently.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Cecilofs
 


I gave a list of years early on in the thread and asked if any were novel. One of those years was 1890 and people refused saying I was just trying to do a gotcha. Actually I was running a test.

Spaceflight has nothing whatsoever to do with 1890 being in my opinion a novel year. Something much more stunning and directly affecting people forever happened in that year.

If TWZ can be "mined" for resonances, then there must be these resonances that connect 1890 to other novel events showing how 1890 is novel.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Cecilofs
 


I gave a list of years early on in the thread and asked if any were novel. One of those years was 1890 and people refused saying I was just trying to do a gotcha. Actually I was running a test.

Spaceflight has nothing whatsoever to do with 1890 being in my opinion a novel year. Something much more stunning and directly affecting people forever happened in that year.

If TWZ can be "mined" for resonances, then there must be these resonances that connect 1890 to other novel events showing how 1890 is novel.


"About 300,000 Swedes emigrated to the United States.
Chinese, Scandinavian and Irish immigrants laid 73,000 miles (117,000 km) of railroad tracks in the USA."

"Many looked towards America for a better life during this time. It is believed that between 1850 and 1910 more than one million Swedes moved to the United States"

Source : Wikipedia.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by theursprachist
 


Very cool information, but that is not what makes the year 1890 so novel in my opinion. An important event takes place then that leads right into the modern era.

Instead of guessing we should be looking for information from the TWZ for years that resonate with 1890 to see what sorts of things are common to each year. Isn't that what we should be doing?
edit on 23-6-2011 by stereologist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


So just tell us what you are thinking of. Off the top of my head I can only think of the industrial revolution and the invention of electricity, both of which are energy related. I think the telephone was around then as well? That's communication related.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by theursprachist
 


Very cool information, but that is not what makes the year 1890 so novel in my opinion. An important event takes place then that leads right into the modern era.

Instead of guessing we should be looking for information from the TWZ for years that resonate with 1890 to see what sorts of things are common to each year. Isn't that what we should be doing?
edit on 23-6-2011 by stereologist because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join