Will the 2012 believers learn from this experience?

There are comments here and there that people believe they are ascending. The call for this has certainly dropped in the last few days.

Here is a question people can ask of themselves:

How can I differentiate a real change from wishful thinking?

In other words, how can you be certain that you are not deluding yourself. Remember that in many science experiments the observer is shielded from the experiment by using blinding. The person administering a treatment has no idea whether they are using a sham or the real thing. If they did they might use them in different ways. They might pass on information to the receiver that is unintended.

There have been many clever ideas that allow a test to be made and prevent issues in the testing process.

Think how you might be able to answer the question yourself without resorting to something like claiming "I resonated with the idea."

The question of this thread is, will the 2012 believers learn from this experience?

Here is a better question. Will the skeptics learn from the following evidence?

Graph of Accumulating Deviations: The Complete Formal Database

The two following figures represent the history of our formal hypothesis testing. The first shows the Z-scores for more than 350 formally specified events in an ordinary scatterplot. While there is a noticeable positive bias, it is not easy to see its significance. Yet the odds against chance of this meanshift over a database this size are about a thousand million to one.



The second figure displays the same data as a cumulative deviation from chance expectation (shown as the horizontal black line at 0 deviation). Truly random data would produce a jagged curve with no slope, wandering up and down around the horizontal. The dotted smooth curves show the 0.05 and 0.001 and 0.000001 probability envelopes that indicate significant versus chance excursions. This figure can be compared with a "control distribution" using simulations of the event series.

The jagged red line shows the accumulating excess of the empirically normalized Z-scores relative to expectation for the complete dataset of rigorously defined events. The overall result is highly significant. The odds against chance are much greater than a million to one.



I doubt skeptics will give it any thought. It seems like ATS skeptics don't learn from things they can't easily debunk. They just ignore it and move on to an easier target to debunk with their lies.

reply to post by BlueMule


The skeptics already know that this is nothing more than contrived and questionable statistics.

Will the believers finally learn that?

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by BlueMule

 

The skeptics already know that this is nothing more than contrived and questionable statistics.

Will the believers finally learn that?

The believers know that the skeptics are full of #.

Will the skeptics finally learn that?

reply to post by BlueMule

The believers know that the skeptics are full of #.

Will the skeptics finally learn that?

A laughable statement after posting a laughable experiment.

Good work showing why being a skeptic always trumps being a gullible believer.

It seems another believer has been loud and clear about not learning from the 2012 experience.

Are there any believers that did learn and have useful hints to pass along to others as to how they recognized mistakes they have made that they will try to avoid in the future?

reply to post by BlueMule


I'm sorry that chart does not explain that the world is going to end due to some "nibiru" or that the population is acending to a higher plane of existence....

I don't quite get why you think it does, or that it shows that 2012 is somehow a "special year" considering the graph ends in 2008.

The scientists with their 60 or so REGs placed around the planet are probably not interested in whether Mother Teresa's reputation was deserved or whether the frenzy over Princess Dianna's death or any other event on the planet is due to media hype. They work backwards from the data these machines spit out and look for one or more that is statistically odd according to some arbitrary formula--no matter how many people accept it and use it, the statistical formulae used are always arbitrary--and then correlated it to whatever. For all they know--to borrow from Jim Alcock--Zeus could be producing their "anomalies" just to torment them. If they don't work backwards to shoehorn the data to whatever, they pick some event beforehand and then monitor all their machines and try to find some data from one or more of those machines that looks statistically odd and that they can correlate with whatever event they've designated. Furthermore, since these scientists have no theory as to how this so-called global consciousness might work, they have no guidance as to what they ought to control for. Should they be concerned with the temperature or moisture of the rooms that their machines are in, if they're in rooms? Should they be concerned about waves from cell phones, radios, televisions, the sun, and so on? They have no idea what else, besides their beloved global consciousness, might affect their REGs. In fact, they have no reason, as far as I can tell, for thinking something like global consciousness is involved at all.

From: Link With regards to the GCP..

What will 2012 believers learn from this experience?

-That its 2012 every day of the week here on ATS.

-That by scratching their left ear lobe and looking at the sun upside down by looking through your legs one can view nibiru. There's a clause to this one and it states that the procedure might not work unless you have had your right earlobe pierced by a Maya witch doctor.

-That they currently reside in the 89th and a third dimension

-That Inhaling and exhaling of certain substances can change their perception of the world around them

-that they were right

Could keep going on and on, it all depends on what was believed.

I was and still am a 2012 believer in the most basic forms, the symbols exist that are used to create dates in this case numbers so I believe in 2012 to be real.

What I did learn is that misinterpretation is wide spread world wide covering everything from religion to staring at somebody while in public and instead of learning to express ourselves better we choose to quarrel or debate

reply to post by stereologist

Will the 2012 believers learn from this experience?

With the exception of a small minority, my guess would be NO.