sorry if I upset anyone with that. I was just basing what my oh so inteligent High School Teachers talked about during those few times we were allowed to be taught that (Mainly in history).

Meh, Guess this is why I shy away from religous things, I beleave in God, but that's as far as it goes for me.
Oh well, carry on.

EDIT
Aussie Bloke's little hooplah turned a father insane. He killed his entire family, and then himself, to protect them from the doom rain.

No, I do not call that a "hoot"?? Please explain just what it is (in what you quoted) that you find so funny??? Or are you just "jerking our chains"??

It's called fearmongering...I don't think that the BA allows it here either!

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

One thing that a lot of predictions like Jasmine's seem to have in common is that the low-probability event they prophesy always seems to be aimed at a specific and relatively small target. That makes the likelihood of its occurrence much lower still, by many orders of magnitude.

Let's look at what Jasmine has predicted (as well as we can, given the descriptions we've gotten):

1. A fireball will occur, a natural occurrence (not a human action). Well, sure. Fireballs can and do occur with some regularity.

2. It's gonna be a big one -- big enough to cause many casualties. Oops, the odds just got a lot longer. The last natural "fireball" that might have caused a lot of casualties took place almost a century ago.

3. It's going to happen "on or around" July 13. Oh my, there went a few more orders of magnitude. The chances of a bolide big enough to cause mass destruction are vanishingly small on any give date, or even any given time window (like, say, a specific month). This is quite basic to probability theory.

4. It's going to affect the area of Las Vegas, Nevada. Well, now I'd say we're down in the homeopathic dilution range. Let's say that we include the entire state of Nevada, or even the whole of the American Southwest. That's still a truly tiny fraction of the globe. In fact, if a bolide were to land anywhere, the odds are that it will hit in the ocean, which makes up some 70% of the Earth's surface.

This strikes me as a sort of Hollywood syndrome. Movie disasters never seem to happen in the middle of the Gobi desert, or in, say, Tunguska, Siberia. No, the darn meteor is always aimed straight for New York or L.A.

I suppose that the spirit who whispers in the sensitive's ear might apply a filter, and only warn of the events that would harm a lot of innocent people -- that would be a thoughtful precaution on the spirit's part.

Still, I for one would sure appreciate it if there weren't quite so many false alarms. How many "sky is falling" cries do we hear every single year? How many of these actually pan out? I'm starting to think that this planet has a bad case of "the visionary that cried 'wolf'" -- and maybe, just maybe, that's the worst aspect of these situations. What if we all get so used to predictions of doomsday that we ignore a valid warning?

No, I don't think God is relevant here. You have made a testable prediction, and now we await the test. That is relevant. When the prediction does or does not come true, then perhaps a discussion of your methods becomes relevant... but not on this board. The astronomy of this is relevant here. If you want to discuss the religious significance, there are many other boards that allow that. I recommend James Randi's.

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

hmmm

Seems pretty obvious, to me.

Here's a little prediction based on my observations of message boards since the last century: If you continue to allow this kind of hogwash on your board you can expect to see a lot more threads like this.

Or you could just invite everyone to make our own wild predictions and rename this forum Really Bad Astronomy....

__________________
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.

- Jesus -

The BA took the words out of my mouth, for I definitely agree with him on that point. We should focus on making observations of predicted events. There is no reason to speculate on the mechanism of an occurance if there is no occurance. After this (if it's dramatic enough) or several more similarly founded observations in the affirmative we might investigate a possible cause. I think everyone here probably has a pending hypothesis of causality regardless of outcome, so we might as well wait for actual data to debate.

Thanks, but I still agree with the BA

I know that if you truly believe this will happen you are probably doing some soul searching on what action, if any, to take. I've had to deal with that before, but without knowing the circumstances of your source, I can not advise you on any action. However, I don't think this board is designed to assist in any form other than awaiting and examining any results. If you want to pursue further discussions regarding other aspects of this subject then there are other avenues, such as private messages, email, or other bulletin boards (such as FWIS) where you can reach many of the people posting in this thread.

__________________
"Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone." -- Sir Elton John

J Pax

IMO, this thread should probably have been locked or abandoned as soon as ...
Not that for a second I'm telling the BA 8) how to treat this. I have great respect for the way Phil's responded. But is there really any point in discussing 'predictions' from 'god' on an astronomy board? 8-[

__________________
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." - Isaac Asimov

Not to overstep my bounds, here, but why is this thread still active? There's not even a relevant discussion going on here, as far as I can tell. Jasmine's latest post have had nothing to do with her OP, they're just filler.

Just my 2 cents on this.

Well I did not post here to receive a hammering in return, but there is a launch from Vandenburg that day.

It's been amusing, though. Thank goodness, I got all my soul searching done while working for a non-profit Counseling Center.

Well, I know I am past the point of exasperation. This thread should only be 1-2 pages long max. An original question, some requests for clarification, a couple answers, a couple more requests for information, recommendation for principles for observation, and then waiting to see.

The reason this thread is this long is because some people have jumped their guns, leaped to conclusions, made fallacious arguments, made irrelevant arguments, made irrelevant statements, and introduced endless errata. There is a time and place for inanity, but I don't think this is it. I am not chiding anyone, nor is it my place to do so. I may be guilty as well.

I am no longer assured that this thread serves any useful purpose. I've done what I could to keep it on track. Maybe this thread should be locked until the target day arrives. Furthermore, I think the BA implied he didn't want any subsequent investigations pursued here, in which case there would be no need to unlock. At any rate, I think I will abandon this thread. I may check back on Tuesday. Anyone wishing to discuss this further can PM me.

__________________
"Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone." -- Sir Elton John

J Pax

I'm not gunna bother wading through what appears to be 9 pages of bickering over woo² claims so I'm just going to wait until the 14th and assuming that BA hasn't locked this thread by then I'll come back and go "neener neener neeer."

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

In my opinion, psychics are all liars and should get a new job. If they are right 99.9% right, they are still wrong. If there were psychics, why haven't they told the world about what's going to happen. Why the secret? It's easy. It's all nonsense.

Ironically, Jasmine's theory is scientific because it's falsifiable.

I have just cancelled my holiday in Las Vegas, and re-booked to Cuba. To pay the extra air-fare I'd like to place a little wager on this fireball.

So it will hit Las Vegas on the 14th'ish!?

How precise can you be about the date, Jasmine?
Roughly how big will this fireball be?
Could it be ball-lightning, or are we talking about big hot rocks? (Nasty!)
Will the Grand Canyon suffer any consequences. (I hope not because I haven't visited it yet.)
Does anybody know where I an get the best odds online? And don't give me any Las vegas based bookies, please!

Thank you

Strong words! Cambridge professor: www.sheldrake.org

If you havn't already checked it out here's some interesting reading on Sheldrake at Mr Randi's site:

http://www.google.com/u/JREF?q=Sheldrake

__________________
N6MAA10816
Faber '62 ΔTX
Are you a Bright?

Yes they are...deservedly so.

So are we suppose to believe this Skeldrake "guy" because of his association with Cambridge?

Better yet, Sheldrake should take Randi's million dollar challenge!

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Wow, R.A.F. we must be psychic... Starts backing away & running for the $1,000,000 before you

__________________
N6MAA10816
Faber '62 ΔTX
Are you a Bright?

Man, what a mountain out of a molehill...

Had her initial question regarding astronomy just been answered without getting all worked up, it would have been a tiny thread and all parties would have been happy.

Instead now it reminds me of Brer Rabbit and the tar baby...

__________________
______________________________________________
“He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes; he who does not ask a question remains a fool forever”
Chinese proverb
"All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence - and then success is sure." - Mark Twain.

Calling someone else a liar on this board without evidence is an ad hominem. I will agree that there is no evidence at all for any psychic powers, but that does not make a self-professed psychic a liar.

First warning.

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

Have you read the conditions of Mr Randi's little test? No one in their right mind would take it, let alone someone proposing more subjective and transient phenomena.

He is clearly looking for definitive proof. The type of proof that contradicts the foundations of falsifiability just for starters.

Here are some quotes from it:

1. ...All tests must be designed in such a way that the results are self-evident, and no judging process is required...

2. ...Since claims vary greatly in character and scope, specific rules must be formulated for each applicant...

3. ...We consult competent statisticians when an evaluation of the results, or experiment design, is required. We have no interest in theories or explanations of how the claimed powers might work; if you provide us with such material, it will be ignored and discarded...

4. ...When entering into this challenge, the applicant surrenders any and all rights to legal action against Mr. Randi, against any persons peripherally involved, and against the James Randi Educational Foundation...

There is absolutely, and I repeat, absolutely, No way that the BBT, Dark Energy and Dark Matter would ever pass these tests, and this is certainly no insult to these theories.

He's looking for definitive proof? Heaven forbid. That certainly sounds worse than just taking someones word for it. :roll:

Considering no one has yet shown definitive proof of having such powers, the rules seem alright by me.

Dark energy is out there. Again: Casimir effect. Quantum vacuum fluctuations. Zero-point energy.

Dark matter is obviously there, we just don't know what it is. Remember that it can be baryonic - at the distances involved, there is no way to detect non-luminous matter.

The BBT stands up to a lot more than the EU does.

So far, not one prediction by a "psychic" has come true.

Telepathy would require the human brain to have some interesting add-ons - parts which definitely do not exist. (I'm talking radio transmitters, Soup...)

The (incredibly weak) electromagnetic waves generate by the brain have not the range, frequency, or bandwidth to transmit large amounts of data over long distances.

If telepathy did exist, it would probably be pretty wide-spread. (Remember, being able to communicate in such a discreet fashion, or to detect out-of-site predators, would be an enormous evolutionary advantage...)

As the BA said, telepathic communication not involving electromagnetic waves would require massive alterations to the way that our universe works - alterations that would have very visible effects other than telepathic phenomena.

Not one shred of evidence exists which shows that some people are capable of telepathy.

And, just for good measure, FTL communication via telepathy is completely impossible, or at least impossible without even more radical alterations to the laws of physics.

Because human judges can be biased, and innate biases will almost certainly affect the interpretation of ambiguous results.

Could you apply the same rules to a supposed psychic as to a perpetual motion device?

Would you accept a "scientific explanation" for a phenomenon not yet explained by science, into which no research at all has been done? Would you accept such an explanation from someone with virtually no knowledge of science? I thought not. (This one probably applies mostly to the perpetual motion crowd - AFAIK, no "psychic" has yet attempted to explain their "powers" in scientific terms.)

This is because of the high chance that the people applying for the prize are frauds - many of them would be quite happy to sue anyone whose results didn't show them to be correct. It is a little extreme, perhaps, but is probably necessary to prevent a very large number of lawsuits... Let's face it, a phony "psychic" would not like having his or her phonyness exposed.

__________________
If ignorance is bliss, why is the world so full of misery?

Try reading the next sentence after definitive proof. What's your defintion of proof, BTW? :roll:

Thank you GJ. On this basis it would fail the Randi test!

So you would use robotic judges?

Agreed, but this a two way street. No one is above the law.

Wrong. Remember: psychic phenomena are not obviously existant.

Nope, you'd just make sure that the results were not ambiguous.

True, but it is much more likely that a "psychic" would sue than the reverse. Remember, a lot of those people make their living via their suposed "powers"...

__________________
If ignorance is bliss, why is the world so full of misery?

And why should they...these things you've mentioned are not paranormal claims.

That's what Randi's challenge is about!

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Oh come on, you're trying to connect Randi's challange with cosmological theories? :roll: Are you having a laugh or do you seriously not understand the nature of the challenge?

__________________
N6MAA10816
Faber '62 ΔTX
Are you a Bright?

That's my point. And they still wouldn't pass the test! Dark Matter isn't normal matter, either.

I'm deadly serious. See above. Are you suggesting that double standards are acceptable; that cosmological theories do not require such stringent guidelines? Get real! Science isn't about this kind of selectivity.

And Dark Matter is.

Soupdragon2, then I would seriously recommend you research what constitutes a 'scientific theory' or a 'hypothesis'. You are not making yourself look too good here 8-[

__________________
N6MAA10816
Faber '62 ΔTX
Are you a Bright?

Proof? Well, lets see. I've not seen one prediction come true. Proof would be 100% undeniable and testable evidence of psychic powers. They would also have to repeat said powers with the same 100% undeniable conclusion. That's what Randi is looking for, right? It's also something all "psychics" are lacking.

By the way, we're not discussing Dark Matter, Dark Energy or the BB in this thread. Using them to negate James Randi's rules regarding psychic phenomena isn't going to fly.