Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
"Bible Code" studies are silly!
Shlama Otto,

You wrote
Quote::"All I found looking at his data was a typical Gaussian distribution of observations having a larger than ideal variance."

That is a self contradiction. A Gaussian distribution, by definition,cannot have the over 160 large variances from expected results I have found. Gaussian distribution is a normal bell shaped curve. Mine is anything but that. The data have variances which are almost 5 times what is expected, on average. Such a large standard deviation represents a one in 1.6 million probability. 42% of the variances are 3 standard deviations or greater. That is 140 times the expected number of 3 standard deviations.It is simply incorrect for you to call this a Gaussian distribution. A Gaussian curve would have had 1 SD of 3 or more, just like the control data has.

You may not like the way I did the experiment, but that does not change the data results I have found. The control data was generated in exactly the same way
as was the Peshitta data, and the control data is Gaussian in nature. You seem to think that abnormal Peshitta results proves that I analyzed the text "improperly". Who sets the standard and parameters by which one should search for coded information? Otto?

We've been throgh this before , Otto, and I know where you're going with this. Even if you sum up the numbers for each search word, you still get highly abnormal results overall. The results would still not be Gaussian. And you can't change the results by not liking them. They are what they are and will remain what they are. If you want to discredit them, repeat the experiment on another non Bible text of similar size with approx. the same number of data and show the same abnormal non Gaussian results. Get your feet wet and do the hard work, then perhaps you will appreciate what I have done.

I also did a more exhaustive text using Randy Ingermanson's (PHD in Physics) Codecracker software for the Peshitta. It tests for Hebrew or Greek language patterns in a series of skip texts. Randy claims in his book Who Wrote The Bible Code? that the software shows that there is probably no Bible Code in the Hebrew Bible or in The Greek NT. The problem with his experiment was that he tested less than 1% of the possible skip texts (skipping 1-150 letters for each search). I have tested the Hebrew and Aramaic Testaments with his software, at skips 1-5000. The results are practically identical to my Codefinder experiment. Codecracker also analyses the data statistically, and about 42% of the Z scores are greater than 3.0 for 3 Western versions of The Peshitta. This validates and confirms the first results. I further did a test on 10 individual NT Peshitta books in Codecracker. Those results also agree with the other two experiments and yield equivalent Z Score results.

All of the above led me to believe in 2003 that The Peshitta is the original inspired NT text and that the Greek is a translation of it. This I verified by several more exhaustive Aramaic-Greek word comparisons throughout the respective Peshitta-Greek Testaments, to see which was truly the translation, by using the Hebrew Bible and LXX as a model by which to compare. The results are also in my book,
Quote:Divine Contact
. There is also an analysis of conjunctions & personal pronouns in the Greek & Aramaic, compared to the LXX-Hebrew model.

All ten analyses essentially say the same thing, but I would not have gotten to step 10 without the codes experiment in step 1. Step 1 strongly suggested The Peshitta was written by God. Step 2 confirmed it. Step 3 also confirmed it. Steps 4 (Historical evidence, Internal Greek & Aramaic, Linguistics,several Primacy tests) thru 10 confirmed the secondary premise that the Greek was translated from The Peshitta.
All this is in my book.
Thank you Otto, for your rigorous skepticism. It is understandable and healthy, in the face of claims such as I have made for codes in The Peshitta, and I welcome it. It can only strengthen the pro arguments if the phenomenon is real. If it is not real, then the skeptics will find that out, and will have done us all a service.
It is interesting, is it not, that Ingermanson's skepticism and software which he claims refuted the codes, has actually verified them, when used to more comprehensively search for ELS's?

Sherman's statistics have all been double checked with a PHD statistician professor in Southern Oregon State University. The stat formulas have been determined to be correctly applied to the ELS searches. Sherman used the same methods to analyse my results as he did his own and others in the Hebrew Bible.

Have You have read Sherman's book or Satinover's book Otto?

I think it behooves you to read them before making up your mind in general, to the effect that codes do not exist in The Bible.

All my experimental results are available to everyone for viewing and download at my web site:

The exact Peshitta module I used in Codefinder is also available at my web site in a zip file, along with 2 other Peshitta versions, including the Khabouris ms.
The modules have all spaces removed from between words, and are only useful with Codefinder software. Just look for "Peshitta Research" on the home page and follow the links.

Many blessings,


Messages In This Thread
"Bible Code" studies are silly! - by ograabe - 02-18-2008, 12:58 AM
Re: "Bible Code" studies are silly! - by yaaqub - 02-18-2008, 02:22 AM
Re: "Bible Code" studies are silly! - by gbausc - 02-18-2008, 04:56 PM
Re: "Bible Code" studies are silly! - by ograabe - 02-18-2008, 06:43 PM
Re: "Bible Code" studies are silly! - by gbausc - 02-19-2008, 08:11 PM
Re: "Bible Code" studies are silly! - by ograabe - 02-27-2008, 12:29 AM
Re: "Bible Code" studies are silly! - by gbausc - 02-29-2008, 04:41 PM
Re: "Bible Code" studies are silly! - by ograabe - 03-17-2008, 08:42 PM
Re: "Bible Code" studies are silly! - by gbausc - 03-18-2008, 01:39 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)