Statistical Analysis of Titu Case

Discussion in 'SCIENTIFIC and ANECDOTAL research' started by Steve, Nov 30, 2003.

  1. Steve

    Steve Grand Poobah Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 1997
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Media, PA, USA
    Carol received this email recently. It's so interesting I thought I'd share it here. The chances of Titu's memories being totally random are, he estimates, one in ten-thousand million billion.
    Jim's email is deardorj@proaxis.com

    **********************
     
  2. Deborah

    Deborah Executive Director Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 1997
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    631
    Location:
    CA - USA
    FANTASTIC

    I have to print this out -- Thank You Steve!

    I also look forward to checking out Jim's website. ;)
     
  3. Titus Rivas

    Titus Rivas Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2000
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Nijmegen, The Netherlands
    More attention

    Hi Steve,

    I just wanted to say that I'm impressed by Jim Deardorff's important application of a general method originally developed by Peter Sturrock.

    Let's hope it will receive the attention it deserves.

    Best wishes,

    Titus
     
  4. Deborah

    Deborah Executive Director Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 1997
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    631
    Location:
    CA - USA
    What do members think of the information Carol Bowman recieved from Jim Deardorff, Research Professor Emeritus
    Oregon State University?

    I would love to hear your thoughts.
     
  5. Rod

    Rod Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2002
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Washington-Baltimore Region, USA
    Finally... someone "does the math"!

    The professor is right on target in his methodology. A lot more similar study is needed, of individual cases and across cases. It is my belief that scientific proof of reincarnation is much closer at hand than most people realise.

    Statistics give us the power to analyse a series of data, rather than just a single point, in order to determine relevance. Often the random probablity of each individual event is great enough to render it insignificant, but the overall picture is one that is highly unlikely by chance. In my own case, I used this method, to confirm apparent past-life memories.

    In a very brief dream, I was looking at newspaper and glanced momentarily at an ad for a local radio station. My thoughts were of general disinterest and could be voiced as "oh, that must be one of the stations around here," as if I was traveling and unfamiliar with it. At that moment, the ad did not seem "old-fashioned" or otherwise strange, whereas if one saw it today, it would be viewed as history, rather than just banal promotion of a business. This suggested that it was possibly from the past, and not ramdomly constructed. Since I could have dreamed anything, the mere fact of this has no probability factor of its own.

    The ad said "KLE?, 1410 kc." I did not remember the last letter, but knew it was not a repeat or a vowel. "kc" stands for kilocycles, the standard unit of frequency measure, now know has kiloHertz or "kHz." In the USA, all stations begin with "W" or "K", and there were about 25 stations on 1410 in the late 40's and in the 50's, the era of the ad.

    Thus, any letter could follow a "K". Since there were actually only 2 "KL" stations, the probability of one having an "E" next is 2/26 (2 chances, 26 letters in the alphabet with roughly equal distribution in radio call signs).

    The next letter being non-repeating, and not a vowel only eliminates seven choices, so that leaves 19/26 chance.

    The actual station KLEM in LeMars, Iowa is/was on 1410, so this part checks and passes the test.

    I remembered them having a logo with a wide, oval microphone, shown vertical, with their call leters on the top, and frequency on the bottom halfs, printed in wide block letters insice the microphone. By calling KLEM and having the only "old" employee describe the early logo, I found out this was all true, though it hasn't been used in many years and has been forgotten -- it's not even in an archive or old picture at the station. Then, I measured this against general information about radio station logos from that era.

    About half of all stations had microphone logos at that time. Chance, therefore is 1/2.

    Logo microphones with typically either round (the "lollipop" type), narrow oval, wide oval, or long and tapered. Thus this is a about a 1/4 chance.

    Many microphones in logos were tilted, as if toward an announcer, others were vertical, or occasionally horizontal. Chances - 1/3 of the right outcome

    About half of all logos of the era had a cartoon figure of an announcer, this did not. Chances - 1/2

    About half had call-letters and other infrmation printed around, not on the microphone. This one was on the mic.
    Chances - 1/2

    The arrangement of call letters, frequency and possibly city or region could have been in any of several different positions on the mic. Specifically having call letters on top and frequency on the bottom carriers a probility of about 1/4.

    Commercial script, wide block, and times roman were all common fonts on logos, but wide block was slightly more common. Chances - 1/2

    What does this all mean? Keep in mind that every remembered aspect of the ad was correct. No detail was wrong. Each individual detail was unremarkable. If one wanted to simply "make up" an imaginary 1950's radio logo, any of these individual elements of its style would have been easy choices. However, the chances of getting ALL of them right can be determined by multiplying the probabilities. It is about 1 in 13662. This removes all doubt about the fact that what I remembered was the actual logo of KLEM radio.

    Next, I needed to know that I had not seen the ad in this lifetime. I have no connections to Iowa. None of my family lives there or close; none of my friends comes from there or close. I have never visited that area, nor has it held special interest for me. I checked my library of books on radio and history, to be sure KLEM was not mentioned in any of them. Then, through Intenet searches, I was able to determine that nothing famous ever happend in LeMars, and KLEM had not achieved any great fame. In summary, this is a very obscure station, in an area which is not near anyplace to which I have any connection whatsoever. Additionally, KLEM is not a station which has preserved its own history (even the second longest-serving employee, there since the early 70's had never seen or heard of this logo). There is no way in this lifetime that I would have encountered KLEM radio, and especially not KLEM radio of the 1950's.

    The proper use of statistics was the only way to realise just how unlikely this information was.

    ...Rod

    P.S.: This formula only worked because all of the remembered details were correct. If any had been wrong, a reverse probability factor would have been needed to determine how much LESS powerful the rest of the story was.
     
  6. vicky

    vicky Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    6
    I'm no mathematician but know just enough to follow what he did and at least the math part seems sound to me. However, I'd like to know how he arrived at some of the percentages. Like how he found out what percentage of people have birth marks where Titu did etc. I imagine that it is possible to find out this kind of info and I definitely believe this guy is accurate.
    Vicky
     
  7. McDebra

    McDebra New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Tennessee, USA
    I've never ever been fluent in mathematics so am impressed with those using the science with ease.
     
  8. Deborah

    Deborah Executive Director Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 1997
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    631
    Location:
    CA - USA
    For those who are scientifically inclined - and research driven - Steve Bowman has posted an interesting letter from Jim Deardorff -Research Professor Emeritus Oregon State University.


    Any thoughts? Reflections? Comments?
     
  9. jhskulk

    jhskulk New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's interesting, but I have a few problems with it:


    1) The values seem sort of arbitrary and I would disagree with quite a few in comparison to others. While due to the amount of arguments involved can ultimately make the basic question (statistical significance) not depend on the specific values, the actual end value would have to be taken with a grain of salt.


    2) The application to each individual point seems a bit odd. If simply one point with the odds of 0.01 is proven, does that show that the case truly has a 1 in 100 chance of being by chance?


    3) There's no given numbers based on the WRONG answers. There needs to be mathematical values given to the WRONG responses given in cases. I'm not familiar with the "Titu" case but values against chance should not be given without incorrect answers as well. Wrong answers do hurt a case even if the right answers are a million to one against chance.


    Not bad, though.
     
  10. Deborah

    Deborah Executive Director Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 1997
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    631
    Location:
    CA - USA
    Interesting reflections jhskulk - thanks for posting! I must have missed this last year. Anyone care to comment?
     

Share This Page