Hi, I am learning Chinese Numerology out of my curiosity. Being a programmer I highly doubt the accuracy of it, so I need to collect more life samples to prove it wrong, however so far I found it far more accurate than random guess.

It's unlike horoscope which mainly describe your character. Chinese Numerology sometimes gives out signs about some of the important events, say, the year where your father/mother left from your life.

Until this moment I would say 30% of the time it's inaccurate, and 70% it's pretty precise

Here's a sample of my analysis:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0An83-jX5WrS4dExzRkIyQ0FsZnhmUlV3Zk9xNm5Qcnc&usp=drive_web#gid=1

If you are interested to let me interpret your fate:

Post your exact date & time of birth. Solar time please.
Check your Solar time of birth here:
http://www.powerfromthesun.net/calculators/LocalToSolarTime.html
Check the Longitude of your birth place here:
http://itouchmap.com/latlong.html

I will prefer to pick those who are 20+ years old to do the analysis. If you are too young, there aren't much signs for me to read about.

By the way, dont take my interpretation seriously.

Thanks :)

Edited 3/23/2014 17:43:37

Here is my interpretation to the fate of one of the well respected Warlight player, who doesn't want his name exposed :)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_JtRjUQQ4hm6yGxj_ZyxphOcQTlljAMh76mqAxGtw9U

charlatanism

myhandisonfire, pls help me to prove this thing wrong by telling me your time and date of birth. If you dont help you probably are the less scientific one.

or, if i ask that warlight player who i have analyzed to pm u, you will at least believe i am not bluffing?

Edited 3/23/2014 19:09:35

My experience *with this stuff is pretty peculiar to say the least.

I've done a couple online Numerology tests which I would give a general score of 75% in terms of accuracy. One thing I noticed was that some parts were vague and could be interpreted broadly, while some were specific and sometimes accurate. Also, my number is consistently 7 (based on 2-3 tests I've taken).

Having lived in Thailand a few years I've run into a few card readers and those who read your "aura" and again it's the same thing. They can pick of some uncannily precise events in your life. I remember taking a stick from a Buddhist blessing holder (or something of that nature). Now as a Christian I'm protective of my beliefs and don't read too much into it, but it said something rather accurately that stuck with me.

There are plenty of things to argue against it, but it's the chicken and the egg theory. Did it happen because you read what the prediction was or was it written because it was going to happen, whether you read it or not?

Science can't deny either and can only mount the empirical evidence available. Calling it charlatanism is unspecific. Sure there are cons out there, but that doesn't make the whole genre false, though be careful with this stuff either way.

Edited 3/23/2014 19:41:17

Until this moment I would say 30% of the time it's inaccurate, and 70% it's pretty precise

If you're writing sentences like this then you have no right to say other people aren't being scientific.

There's such a thing as a priori knowledge. Doesn't matter if you find that numerology is 0% or 100% accurate. Just try explaining to me how the date and location of somebody's birth determines their life events. What is it, magic? Ancient chinese secret?

There are plenty of things to argue against it, but it's the chicken and the egg theory. Did it happen because you read what the prediction was or was it written because it was going to happen, whether you read it or not?

Not even remotely close to being a "chicken or the egg" situation, what you describe is called a self-fulfilling prophecy.

i cant explain why the time and date of birth has anything to do with ones fate. But I can tell you the statistic of its accuracy

I am a programmer, and i studied some philosophy too so I have basic concept of how logics work

I was thinking this numerology was absolutely ridiculous until i found it far more accurate than a random guess should be

pls, at least help me to provethis thing wrong by telling me your time and date of birth. You can help to increase the sample size that i collected

but if you are afraid of testing ur time and date of birth for it, you really have no right claiming it wrong

tell me ur solar time and date of birth, let me interpret, if it is wrong, great, and fair enough, i cant wait to increase the sample size of inaccurate samples.

Edited 3/23/2014 20:17:05

Correlation does not mean the same thing as causation. Move along please.

what you describe is called a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Yup, self-fulfilling prophecy. Ma bad.

My point was that I wouldn't toss it out the window just yet. We haven't account for everything in our solar system just yet and science has a ways to go.

Oh Arun, Leo made a prediction and it was accurate! Leo! You're clairvoyant!

Correlation does not mean causation, nor does it necessarily deny it. Move along again, Arun.

Edited 3/23/2014 20:21:36

Anybody know who James Randi is? If not check out some of his videos on youtube. Entertaining stuff.

Not for the negative arguer to disprove the theory either - until you prove it is correct, I will not take anyone who believes in it completely seriously.

There are plenty of things I'm sure you believe in that haven't been "proven" yet, but have a surmountable pile of evidence suggesting they're true. Then again correlation does not prove causation, right? There could always be another reason.

I'm not arguing for or against, I'm just saying you're contradicting yourself, General :P

Now as a Christian

A motherfucking christian lecturing people in scientific process, fuck. And please, please do not use the word science as if you are talking about a person, "science" does not do or say things. "Science" does not deny things or prove things. You wouldn't say "archaeology discovered a fossil". Or "meteorology said it would rain tomorrow". Idk maybe you would you fucking pseud.

Anyway, a posteriori evidence here falls into the realm of psychology, so at the very least you should say pseudo-science, thanks.

OP, if you are trying to prove it wrong you need to get your fucking methodology straight. First of all you need the experimental group where you actually do the numerology shit for them, according to ancient chinese secrets.

Then you need a control group where you give them a random one that isn't anything to do with them (probably best to use the same one for each person in the control group. I don't know if this is possible for people of different ages, maybe you could just make it up if you need to, or make a composite). Afterwards, you can let them know that it was made up and give them their real one if they would like, just don't include that in your results.

And obviously, before you gave them the random one, they must believe that it is genuine. So you probably wouldn't be able to get people from this thread now I've said this.

THEN, you need some sort of quantitative method to measure the accuracy. None of this fucking "yeah well my dad died the year before so I guess" or "oh I'd say there's a 29.3% chance of it being 79.1% somewhat accurate". You need a scale to rate it on, probably either 4-5 points from completely accurate to neither to completely inaccurate. Either get them to score it themselves or ask for qualitative responses and create a score for them.

You'd also need to define your terms, exactly how accurate is "somewhat accurate" and "completely accurate"? Additionally, some of these predictions are vague by nature, so you would generally be unable to describe those as completely accurate.

Then you compare avg accuracy between groups. Your hypothesis is a null hypothesis so the difference should approach zero as number of participants increases.

That's how you do pseudoscience, motherfuckers. If you aren't doing this then don't bother. And don't bother at all because there is obviously no connection between longitude of birthplace and life events anymore than there is between your personality and fucking Jupiter.

Unless you're just doing it for fun and don't believe in it a single tiny bit. I would be amused to see what I would get but I'm under 20 and don't know what time I was born.

Edited 3/23/2014 20:44:30

I also enjoy flow chart quizzes in kids magazines where it tells you which character you are, but people don't base their life on those, I guess because there are no ancient chinese secrets involved.

Oh yeah, there's equations you can use to work out if your result is statistically significant but I can't remember any of them. psychology is a pseudo-science so you can probably just make it up

A motherfucking christian lecturing people in scientific process, fuck.

I'm not lecturing anyone on science or scientific process. Also, what does being a Christian have to do wit being able to conduct a scientific study? We're not all Southern Baptists, mulvon.

I was saying based on my personal experience and I was admitting that some claims were "vague" or perhaps I should say "very vague" and sometimes they were "more precise" but not necessarily "very precise". 75% accuracy doesn't mean it got 75% of my life correct. It simply means that a paragraph or two of what was written seemed to apply to my life in a general sense.

And don't bother at all because there is obviously no connection between longitude of birthplace and life events anymore than there is between your personality and fucking Jupiter.

If you want to make that assertion, take the time to prove it following the proper scientific process you're taking the time to preach about. Having an effect is one thing, being able to accurately discern that effect and turn it into a numerology-type generalization is a whole other.

Go and earn some money with your 70%

http://www.skepdic.com/randi.html

but people don't base their life on those

Yeah, I've been so lost ever since the subscription to my horoscope ran out...>.>

fair enough, i would change it to a scale of 1 to 10. I will gather group of ppl to do that later on, right now it is pretty informal, I just really think that if i interpret for like 5 ppl here, and most of the interpretations are wrong, then i really dont need to go thr the troubles of setting up a large formal test

Once i interpret some of the fates here, lets discuss how to rate the accuracy

btw, x, asks your mother for ur time of birth, i will just see if there is anything fun enough to tell even you are still young. as i have said, dont treat the whole thing too seriously

Also, what does being a Christian have to do wit being able to conduct a scientific study?

Since you love a posteriori evidence so much, you should have realised by now that there is no god. Otherwise you're a pretty shit scientist. Let's tabulate:

You believe in god, and possibly some other christian bullshit like jesus was a real person and he is also god or whatever

You thought Emily was female

You either agreed with his absurd logic, or at least tolerated it

You're a men's rights activist

You are sympathetic to numerology

On that evidence, excuse me for saying that you wouldn't be amazing at scientific studies. Or logic generally. Give OP your birth date and location, and by the powers of ancient chinese secret, he will probably also tell you that you make a shitty logician. "2012-2022, this decade is all about being bad at logic :P"

I was saying based on my personal experience

cool, anecdotal evidence, fun times. love anecdotal evidence

Having an effect is one thing, being able to accurately discern that effect and turn it into a numerology-type generalization is a whole other.

dont understand this bit

i would change it to a scale of 1 to 10.

In this case you need ten definitions since you have to define what each point means, so that people will know the difference between a 7 and an 8. People who are responding, if they are scoring themselves, and people reading results have to actually know what each point on the scale means.

You don't need to actually gather a group, just put every first respondent in the experimental group and every second respondent in the control group.