what is "numerical pareidolia" ? please.
I think these 'co incidences' are wonderful.
by atomant 136 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
what is "numerical pareidolia" ? please.
I think these 'co incidences' are wonderful.
C'mon, Zeb. Got a dictionary? I gave you the definition in my comment.
If you've got a few million sets of numbers to work with, a lot of them are gonna line up.
Same shit that bible code wack jobbers are into.
atom ant: "Of course man ‘evolved’ because of the alignment! It’s proven by our existence here at this time--
Many factors go into the evolutionary process that produced us, looking at total solar eclipses is not one of them. but if you were a worker, making the solar system, this "same apparent size at this time" would be a non essential artistic touch to prove your creative prowess. A non-biblical message from a creator, build into the laws that govern us, or the whistle while i work?
At first glance I thought that link was MARK COCK RING.
How appropriate that would be since the OP is a load of bollocks.
You're looking at a collection of numbers and seeing faces in them. Invisible, imaginary faces - Nathan Natas
This is exactly the sort of silliness that got Russell fixated on the length of the corridors in the great pyramid of Egypt. When Rutherford has to change the dates to 1925 he magically added some inches to corridor.
atomant-
" 1/366 = 0.002732 Interesting?
1/27.32 = 0.0366 More interesting?
If you are seeing nothing, don’t let the numbers block your view. Remove all the decimal points and zeros, because they are simply scalar indicators, and notice that 2732 and 366 are reciprocal opposites.
Earth and Moon are ‘locked’ in a numerical reciprocal relationship!"
-------------------
There is a lot of dishonesty in your equations. In your example that I've quoted above you have gone to two decimal places regarding the moons orbit but you have rounded up earth's rotations in a year.
If we use your equation using two decimal places on earth's annual rotations, your equasion looks like this:-
1/366.26 which equals 0.0027300879 as a decimal.
Using your theory of rounding up the decimal conversion of the fraction you end up with it actually being 2730. Subsequently there is no correlation at all so can hardly be claimed as a 'numerical reciprocal relationship'.
Minor correction to Giles's post: I think an earth year is 365.24 days, so there is an even less of a "numerical reciprocal relationship".
Also the ratio of Earth mass to Moon mass is 81.29, not 81, which blows away a whole heap of the "numerical pareidolia".
And on it goes, through the rest of the article.
shepheardless-" Minor correction to Giles's post: I think an earth year is 365.24 days, so there is an even less of a "numerical reciprocal relationship"."
Yes true. My calculations were based on the total revolutions the earth makes in a year. I was being kind to atomant by giving the huge 'benifit of the doubt' to his figure of '366 cycles'.
To be consistent to atomant's equasion, you would need to calculate the amount of days in a sidereal year, which would be 365.25636, or 365.26 days if we round up to two decimal places. You then obviously have to add a day for one annual orbit of the sun hence 366.26 rotations in total.
But you are correct that in the Gregorian year and the Tropical year there are 365.24 days when rounded up to two decimal places.
Using 365.24 days in the equasion you end up with 0.0027379, or converted 2738.
Not quite the figure that atomant is looking for to prove his theory.
Just realised how much of a nerd I sound. I will stop there.
Yes, but if you apply the irrefutable, scientifically proven principle of time, times and half a time to atomant's 'math', it works out perfectly.
I got something even better, but it points in the same direction. You be the judge.
A broken clock is right twice a day, even if you use accuracy to the 1 billionth of a second. Isn't that incredible?
Two is the base of the binary system, which is indispensable for any digital system. Two is the number of humans that is required to produce life in a natural environment, "2" is required for human life to exist. Also, in mitosis a cell subdivides in two (not three or four or five). Also we have pairs of chromosomes, not triads. Also the day is divided in two stages, day and night. Also it takes two to tango. The miracle of the number two should not be ignored. It's proof that we are special, that we are the center of the attention of Jehovah and Jesus (here's "2" again: two deities, the letter "J" twice). Coincidence? Hell no. Now I am a believer in the divine powers of "2"