Talk:Predictive programming

	This Conspiracy related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

the false dilemma of "predictive programing" vs. pareidolia

like most sceptics, I think the idea that governments or secret societies have the ability or inclination to predictively program is ridiculous but that does not necessarily mean that synchronistic or apparent allusive events are just the product of random chance filtered through pareidolia. to be is to be perceived. from quantum mechanics we know at the small scale observation causes wave function collapse. it is possible that a similar effect works in the aggregate. we don't really know how time works. we don't know if events are predetermined, co-determined or just the product of random chance. true random chance appears to arise from microscopic quantum events which in turn condense out of an ensemble of possibilities when observed. so what would be most interesting to genuinely curious people like me would be rigorous statistical testing the apparent correlation of events across time. can the effect be wholey explained by randomn chance or is there an unexplained degree of correlation suggesting anotger hypothesis like reality is created by the aggregate of conscious observations or reality is fractal like and exhibits self similarity preferentially to raw randomness across time. just hand waving and saying it is all pareidolia is untenable if an unexplained effect remains after statistical analysis. this is how other natural phenomenon like the photoelectric effect were discovered. it is possible if not likely that history is naturally fractal like at all levels. ^{— Unsigned, by: 2600:1000:b150:d280:e588:837:7270:f837 / talk / contribs}

So what you're saying is that while we've got a page on Quantum Woo, we need a page on Fractal Woo. That's very observant. Of course history always repeats itself, except that each time it repeats it's completely different. FairDinkum (talk) 10:54, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

jill stein

why is jill stein linked in this article as a "sheeple waker", i dont care much for jill stein but i clicked on the linked article about her and it looks rather like a crusade/pov-pushing kind of thing instead of a pressing example of a "sheeple waker"

priority

There was a time when scientists would commonly publish their discoveries in anagrams, so that if the claim was confirmed they could say "see, I said so," without risking ridicule before then. I'm a bit surprised not to see a suggestion that media predictions are in the same vein. —Anton Sherwood (talk) 01:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Appeal to victims

"Predictive programming" is now a normal feature of conspiracy theories. An idea about how it might have originated: someone deliberately constructing a conspiracy theory to appeal to people with a shaky grasp of logic might well have used it as a matter of psychology. If your potential suckers have seen the popular media you reference in your claims of prediction, they're quite likely to go "yes, I saw that bit. So this must be true!" Cathay (talk) 20:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Variations of PP

Is there a more specific term for the idea that the [conspiracy] MUST leak their plans to offset their cosmic karmic liability (or something to that effect)? ^{— Unsigned, by: 2603:6010:e921:4200:9c8b:21e0:c22b:74b3 / talk} 18:23, 4 July 2023‎