• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Global Consciousness Project

The Global Consciousness Project seems to be a confidence trick using cherrypicked statistics, which should be viewed with great suspicion.

If the project is supposed to respond to events in real time, why do the anomalies (which are expected to occur every 15 days or so) sometimes start before the event? If the GCP responds to events in the future, how reliable is it as a predictor of events? Can one state for certain that any particular observed anomaly will be associated with a significant event, or do they just cast around looking for significant events in the news that day? I would suggest that it has no value as a predictor, so it is in fact worthless as proof of anything.

There is a contemporary myth that quantum processes are associated with paranormal phenomena; this is almost certainly not the case.
 
Wow, a few people here seem to be missing the point of the project i think. And linking from websites that are covering one specific event, nearly a decade old out of 250+ such events, and then crying foul is hardly a well-rounded rebuttal in my opinion. And Radin is a project member, not the project director so i guess to me thats an important differentiator.

And saying that scientists are only 'right' scientists if they research areas you yourself feel relevant is just ridiculous, again in my humble.

And quotes like:
I would suggest that it has no value as a predictor, so it is in fact worthless as proof of anything.
is a pretty reductive and generally unhelpful statement, especially when it monumentally misses the fundamental principle of the GCP dataset, which can be found in the FAQ section, which i urge people to read for themselves and form their own opinion

'What we do is to predict that if there is a powerfully engaging event in the world -- like the Concorde crash -- the focused attention of large numbers of people will produce a departure from expected behavior in our network of REG detectors. We speculatively imagine a consciousness field that becomes relatively coherent and structured when these occasional global events occur. Continuing the speculation, we suggest that the information in such a field can somehow be absorbed by the REG devices, which then show patterns where none should exist.'

By all means stand at the end of the thoroughfare shouting at passers-by to beware the snakeoil salesman, just i dont see a salesman anywhere round these here parts...

A lot of iconoclastic dogmatism being displayed on the board in general, which personally i don't consider a 'good look'.

Believe or disbelieve as one sees fit but to reject someone's views out of hand, and then heap scorn upon them for holding those views just isn't cricket.
 
Hear hear! Did you read my post one page back?
Me seems that there isn't much reading of people's posts going on, just skimming over and then slapping down one's own opinions. I also doubt that those throwing thoughtless quotes around actually read through the GCP website before commenting. Shame if they were truly interested, they could open their minds to a whole host of new information, from the scientific to the workings of the human mind. :roll:
 
Twin_Star said:
'What we do is to predict that if there is a powerfully engaging event in the world -- like the Concorde crash -- the focused attention of large numbers of people will produce a departure from expected behavior in our network of REG detectors.

B
The GCP admit themselves that this 'effect' often occurs before the event it is linked with, by a variable amount which they are not able to account for; translated into the real world where cause follows effect, that means there is no real causal link.
 
Yes, and that is the interesting part. Us, in our reality, in our dimension or universe or whatever you want to call it, seem to pick up in advance [sometimes] if a large disaster is going to happen. This would make perfect sense in a Holographic Universe or in a Multiverse /Quantum physics. Both theories are more and more taken seriously by a lot of younger scientist and seem to explain a whole lot which was unexplainable before.
You might be interested in reading up or watching clips about the two theories above. But I have to warn you that whilst the Multiverse theory is being actively tested by science, the holographic universe theory has been hijacked by people like Icke and such like. So if you find clips on Youtube, they start well but then descent into lu-lu land.

Quantum physics will explain the GCP data sooner or later. However they have some very interesting data to give to the world thanks to 13 years of observations.
 
Theories like holographic and multiverses,other dimensions, are only theorised to theoretically resolve problems we don't yet know the answers to. Phantom planets were used not so long ago to try to explain delays inplanetary movement. But that's been disproved, and replaced with what we now know to be the effects of light speed lagging due to changes in distances through orbits.
Conjecture, not to be taken too seriously in this case.
 
I'm reasonably well acquainted with both the Multiverse and Holographic Universe theories, but they really have no bearing on this sort of thing; neither does quantum physics, even the Many-Worlds hypothesis, to be honest. It should be noted that the Many-worlds hypothesis and the Multiverse conjecture are different things, although they do overlap somewhat.

No current theory could explain this 'effect', except maybe the theory that certain types of statistical operations are prone to misuse.
 
The stock answer for why the sun's corona is much hotter than the visible surface is that the "mechanism is not well understood at this time". That's the polite way of saying they don't know, maybe have a theory, maybe not. I think the dataset that the GCP is producing up until now could well use the same terminology.

For me personally, i'd be happy to consider a theory that the GCP dataset actually is a tangible manifestation of an, as yet unidentified, natural force. One that works upon / alongside sentience and consciousness. One of the reasons i think this is that the deviation from chance has been some of the highest recorded during times when various groups have actually informed the project team, and then undertaken periods of Transcendental Meditation. I can hear the howls of derision already. ridiculous as it sounds, that's what the data shows. This 'Force' could have other ways of exhibiting its interaction with us: crisis apparitions, precognition, clairvoyance, clairaudience and many others. The fact that it offers practically no replicability and is scornful of scientific method doesnt alarm me unduly. It's not every super-collider collision that makes a quark after all. Or rather, not quarks that we can then go on to weigh and measure.
 
Of course theories are only that, the best means at the time to explain something. However disregarding Multiverse and Holo-Universe, quantum physics is here to stay. QP is not a theory but a new science. The slit experiment is real, even though we don't know exactly why. Light can behave like waves and also like particles, that is also a fact. The quantum world exists, fact. That alone should be enough to find the GCP interesting as it seems to observe something that could be explained by QP. The other theories however also fit in with explanations, so it is fun to match the results from GCP and different theories. I do this a lot and the world becomes a more interesting place and new ideas emerge.

I only keep on going on about this because it was said a few posts back that the GCP is basically a load of baloney [not in so many words but the meaning was clear]. All I was doing is giving a few reasons as to why it may be something more, based on certain theories and certain facts.
That's really all really I tried to do.
I'm not trying to convince anyone about anything, each person has their own beliefs but it could be that maybe they haven't considered everything or some may not even know about these theories and if I think it may be relevant and actually get someone interested, then I don't see why not.
 
Back
Top