numerical mriacle.....again

[truthBtold]

You seem to have completely missed the point of my post, none of it is impressive at all, including the nonsense you posted.

MM

you said they found far more intersting things in their texts. Show me one of it, the most intersting or whatever you wanna call it.

I do not understand why some people think that i am unfamiliar with basic statistics or the rules of really large numbers. Even though you can create an infinite amount of sets with the numbers of a book, it does not mean that u can find "anything" in it that looks intersting to humans.

to explain my point consider following example, you ask me to write down 9 numbers from the set of Rational numbers. I write down,

1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9

it could be really an accident that i wrote only natural numbers down, from small to big, always with an addition of + 1. It might be accidently happen but it would almost absurd to believe that. So we have the +1, natural numbers pattern.

3/2 , 2 , 78 , -9 , 0 , sqrt4 , 99 , 2 , 1

we might say we found the "3/2 , 2 , 78 , -9 , 0 , sqrt4 , 99 , 2 , 1" pattern here. Well, yeah it could be the case that i chose this really absurd pattern. So simply saying that you can find a pattern isnt enough, you can define one into existence but thats just bullshit. You can also cherrypick some numbers from some areas without a concept and then create a pattern, but thats also just bullshit, because thats how you can always create one.

so to summarize, it isnt enough to simply define something as a pattern, and it also not enough to basically randomly choose numbers and creating one.

Are the kid in that bruce Willis movie?? What was that movie about #s