digital goldfish
Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 154
OK, so i know this programme has been shown before, but this is the first time i've seen it, and i wanted to jot down some of my comments, so here goes - apologies if these have been addressed elsewhere:
1) I assume since this was in 2001 and it's now 2004, he hasn't even come close to winning the million.
2)Why is it only major events he predicts? Ok there may be others, but it seems that most predictions are only highly newsworthy items. no one talks about the less impressive ones.
3) Surely Chris french's experiment was flawed? I don't think it's surprising that the participants chose the response that received more news attention, and is therefore more in the forefront of the public conscience.
4) The other thing that i think they should have done is tried to correlate news stories from the time. i.e in the papers he reads, were there any stories speculating about Japan having access to Sarin, for example? It doesn't prove he didn't predict it, but it might explain why he drew these things. Combined with the statistical liklihood, and the event occuring a number of years later, it might make some sense.
5) This issue of drawing a large number of photos, and only having a small number of hits is a real one.
1) I assume since this was in 2001 and it's now 2004, he hasn't even come close to winning the million.
2)Why is it only major events he predicts? Ok there may be others, but it seems that most predictions are only highly newsworthy items. no one talks about the less impressive ones.
3) Surely Chris french's experiment was flawed? I don't think it's surprising that the participants chose the response that received more news attention, and is therefore more in the forefront of the public conscience.
4) The other thing that i think they should have done is tried to correlate news stories from the time. i.e in the papers he reads, were there any stories speculating about Japan having access to Sarin, for example? It doesn't prove he didn't predict it, but it might explain why he drew these things. Combined with the statistical liklihood, and the event occuring a number of years later, it might make some sense.
5) This issue of drawing a large number of photos, and only having a small number of hits is a real one.
