All the claim is that a particular bit in a digital record of events taken every 4 seconds is always 0. I am currently working with some complex high precision motorized systems. When my software always sees either a 1 or 0 the assumption is that the value is static because it is: a) connected to a switch that is fixed, or the value is not connected to anything. That is normal. Even the computers in front of us have wires that are not hooked up. The extra wires are there for special situations which do not exist in our regular PCs, but could be hooked up for special high performance situations.
Why am I ridiculing the statement? Simple. The claim used the word impossible. What would have been much better is to state: "Whoa dudes the door never open! What the %$@! is going on?" When someone is involved in confirmation bias they assume that this is the missing smoking gun that everyone has been laboriously searching for. It turns out to be another dead end. The person who thought of this was fairly smart. No doubt about it. The issue is how they took this piece of information and developed the next thought. They didn't.
I'm not going to head over to twoofer heaven. They'll figure it out, but I know and you know that this claim which went from an interesting observation to a knuckle headed conclusion will live on for years. That's just part of CT dream land.Statistics: Posted by Nostradamus — 05 Dec 2009, 10:10
]]>