I've recently been doing a plethora of research into the Bible Code concept on a special program that I've written and developed, and upon completion, I punched the name "Bart Sibrel" into it. My program ran a search of the Book of Numbers (for symbolic reasons, of course), and by searching every tenth letter (our 9 planets plus the approaching Planet X, which is the 10th planet), it came up with this message:
"Bart Sibrel Correct"
To say that I was blown away beyond belief is putting it mildly. In all honesty, I never expected this finding. I'm not sure what all of you think of this, but I'd love to hear your input.
The other thing that I did was put a few of the names from the Bad Astronomy sight into this program, and although most of them came up 'empty,' there are a few that did come up with messages! I'll let you digest the above material for now, then relay my other findings tomorrow. This is completely mind-blowing. At first I never even believed the Bible Code concept, but now ... it seems too eerie to be a coincidence.

I'm sorry but this thread makes even less sense than your "Andy Kaufman and R.E.M. & Moon Hoax" thread. What in the heck is “Bible Code” ? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif[/img]

John,

I'll start by assuming that you are serious. I thought you were just yanking our chain on the musical-whistleblowers thing; maybe not.

The one thing you are guaranteed to get if you start searching for "hidden messages" in texts by searching for every x letters, arranged in y-size blocks, etc., is a lot of hits. However, all this proves is that you can get legible words, sometimes, by scanning written material accoroding to various rules. You also get a lot of gibberish, and a lot of meaningless words.

Human brains are very good at finding patterns. But this means that we find a lot of patterns which don't really mean anything.

I suggest you take a look at some sites which explain the limitations on Bible-code type searches, e.g.,
http://www.skepdic.com/bibcode.html.

This kind of pattern-finding can be used to "prove" anything by selectively searching for and discarding data. In other words, it not only proves nothing, it demonstrates nothing, except some fun with statistics.

Are you claiming your letter search is actually evidence that Bart Sibrel is correct? Can you first counter all the examples that have been given on this forum which have already debunked all his arguments?

There's more fun in figuring out how things really work than in trying to ferret out "hidden messages", if ya ask me.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: sts60 on 2002-07-10 15:32 ]</font>

I think John McCartney's had too much "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" - if you catch my hidden message.
"Bart Siebrel correct" - give me a break!

If this is a joke, cute, but it's starting to get a bit tedious. If you're serious, then I highly doubt that you'd love to hear my input.

As for Planet X - there is no such thing, at least not as far as the claimed "Nibiru" super-electro-planet allegedly about to wreak havoc on us. Please don't let Nbiru enthusiasts talk you into believing such nonsense without at least digesting some of the material which conclusively debunks it. The BA says he is working on a Nibiru page; here is a good one already:
http://www.planet-x.150m.com/

Hope this helps. Feel free to ask more followup questions of the BA regulars, there's quite a range of expertise here. Although "Nibiru"-specific questions should go on the "Against the Mainstream" forum.

Actually, I'm very glad that John posted this. I've been having discussions over on a religious BB about the Bible codes, and this is the smoking gun I need to prove to them that the whole idea is bogus.

John, I assume that you do not want me to use your name over on the religious BB when I re-post this?

The (now where's my scissors and glue-gun?) Curtmudgeon

Dude! This is too spooky!

Just before you posted this I was asking myself over and over; "Is Bart Sibrel a fraud?", "Is Bart Sibrel a fraud?".....

And you have the answer; "Bart Sibrel - correct".

I KNEW it! Thanks man, this is TOO cosmic.

Tom,

You had to ask?

I just ran the same program and detected an error in your numbers. I reran it with the correct parameters. It should read: "Bart Simpson Correct." [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

Ok, so what happens when you type in "the Rusty Lander" into the computer program?

__________________
Behind every conspiracy is another conspiracy.

I wouldn't answer that one John, especially since how you're not allowed to swear on this forum. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]