Bogus remnant data for 1935?

headmath

M.J. started a very "interesting" thread here:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/114377/1.ashx

M.J. quotes from several sources for attendance and partakers at the 1935 memorial:

1. The 1936 year book states that 32,795 attended and 27,006 partook.

2. The

3. The watchtower states that 63,146 attended and 52,465 partook

It is my opinion that source data in item number 3 is bogus

Here is why

Divide 63,146 by 32,795 = 1.9254

Divide 52,465 by 27,006 = 1.9427

Notice that the results almost match, suggesting that someone in the has tampered with the source data in item number 1

What ya think

headmath

Sorry! that last post somehow ate a sentence here goes again

M.J. started a very "interesting" thread here:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/114377/1.ashx

M.J. quotes from several sources for the number of memorial attendance and partakers for 1935:

1. The 1936 year book states that 32,795 attended and 27,006 partook.

2. The

3. The watchtower states that 63,146 attended and 52,465 partook

It is my opinion that source data in item number 3 is bogus

Here is why

Divide 63,146 by 32,795 = 1.9254

Divide 52,465 by 27,006 = 1.9427

Notice that the results almost match, suggesting that someone in the has tampered with the source data in item number 1

What ya think

headmath

Sorry agian it keeps eating sentence number 2 I try again

M.J. started a very "interesting" thread here:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/114377/1.ashx

M.J. quotes from several sources for the number of memorial attendance and partakers for 1935:

1. The 1936 year book states that 32,795 attended and 27,006 partook.

2. The

3. The watchtower states that 63,146 attended and 52,465 partook

It is my opinion that source data in item number 3 is bogus

Here is why

Divide 63,146 by 32,795 = 1.9254

Divide 52,465 by 27,006 = 1.9427

Notice that the results almost match, suggesting that someone in the has tampered with the source data in item number 1

What ya think

headmath

This is driving me nuts!!! please disregard the missing sentence number 2 as it won't affect the post anyway. Seems there is a trouble when you copy and paste from microsoft word.

Gamaliel

I believe the difference is US versus other branches. I was going to check that idea when I got a chance for the other thread, but someone has already suggested it.

Gamaliel

headmath

So far ths thread has been viewed 54 times and there is only one reply. That's fine

Everyone keeps saying that the 1936 year book was quoting the memorial numbers for the US only. Well as far as I know there is only ONE year book printed per year. There is no such thing as one year book for Canada and another one for the US .I believe the worldwide numbers for the memorial in 1935 are as described in the 1936 year book.

This watchtower even backs this up

quote

*** w88 12/15 p. 12 par. 10 Angelic Messages for Our Day ***

In 1935 attendance worldwide at the Memorial observance of Jesus’ death was 32,795. Of these, 27,006 partook of the emblems as being the remaining ones on earth of the 144,000, whose hope is heavenly.

end quote

What I think happened was that someone in WTS ville has padded the 1935 memorial numbers by taking a calculator and multiplying by approx 1.94, for what purpose I'm not too sure. They thought no one would notice, but the internet notices everthing.

So now if anyone has any concrete evidence about these other numbers for the 1935 memorial then please explain it

greendawn

Their whole mindset is one that aims to deceive and as a result they have lied umpteen times during their 120 existence, so it is not surprising if they have cooked their statistics, indeed that constant ratio proves that they have cooked their books.

headmath

Spot on Greendawn

ya that constant ratio bit got me wondering too

DannyHaszard

proves that they have cooked their books.

Watchtower demigods are the crooks who cooked the book (Bible)

parakeet

headmath, could you please explain why a constant ratio is statistically significant? Statistics are not my strong suit.
Thanks.
parakeet, of the mathematically challenged class

Bogus remnant data for 1935?

Share this