Very interesting blog site New Morning.
http://2006-course-effects.blogspot.com/ To add to your interrupted time series studies, consider the lady saint, Karunamayi too. She is just finishing a world peace project from the 1980's. Groups of Vedic Priests chanting the 1000 names of Mother Devine. A million recitations by a group of pundits. Since the 1980's and finishes around the new year of 2007. -Doug in FF What about Shree Ma going in to silence in California and her project of yagyas being done there in recent years. What have the buddhists been up to in a bigger way? There are really lots of them. Blips on the curve or waves? Or no relationship except for TM and TM- sidhis as the major footnotes of spiritual influence? Or may be not at all. Keep up the good work and keep us posted. -Doug in FF --- In [email protected], new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], Peter <drpetersutphen@> wrote: > > > > I'll give a more civil response. The methodology > > is all screwed-up. First there is no control. What > > functions as the control? Why do they even mention the > > word "controlled"? In fact this type of research can > > have no control. You would use a design that is called > > "interrupted time series analysis". Basically it's > > measure trends over unit of time; intervention in > > effect and measure trends over unit of time; then no > > intervention and measure trends over unit of time. You > > do this over and over again. Turning the intervention > > on and off, so to speak, and measuring your trends > > with the intervention present and then when it is > > absent. Then you crunch your numbers to see if there > > are statistically significant differences within and > > between these on and off cycles. Simply measuring > > trends and then applying the intervention and seeing > > the trends improve means absolutely nothing in social > > science research. > > Yes, the TMO's "imapct analysis" -- the essence of most ME studies, > is quite weak. As many, and you, have been pointing out, the dose, > intervention, independent variable(s) needs to vary in intensity and > time frame, and "location" to really assess strong correlation -- and > eventually causality. Impact studies can't even determine simple, > insignificant, correlation. One data point points to NO trend. > > > > Its like hiring 100 extra police > > officers for two months and then seeing the crime rate > > drop. It does not mean that the extra officers caused > > the crime rate to drop. The crime rate could have been > > dropping or increasing or staying the same regardless > > of the police officers. That is, what is causing the > > change in crime rate could have nothing to do with the > > police officers. The TM research on the ME, in this > > case, is the same as seeing a car crah after you've > > sneezed and then claiming your sneeze caused the car > > to crash. The only way to know if your sneeze causes > > car crashes is to count car crashes without sneezes, > > then count them while sneezing, then without and so > > forth. > > Yes. However, extending this, if the ME event corresponds to a > significant "rare event" -- as would be the case if the S&P500 > increases another 10-15% in the next 2-3 months, and other "predicted > events" continue to occur (like political transformation, low > hurricanes, etc.) -- that still does not establish causality. Or even > simple correlation. But its hell of an interesting set of > "coincidences". Feedstock and justificatin for real long-term > multivariate causality studies. > > And more than a timeseries analysis, a long term (aka often interupted > or varying independent variable(s)) multivariate analysis is needed -- > to fully control for socio-economic and other factors. > > > > Just so people know, I'd love for there to be a > > ME. It would be so absolutely cool. But outside of the > > one DC study which demonstrated a very, very slight ME > > (and even that is generous) these "studies" are the > > equivalent of a 4th grade science experiment. They are > > junk science and it is truly a shame. I think the > > reason they don't do a time series analysis is that > > they are quite concerned that it would show nothing. > > There are 30-40 studies on ME out there. If the TMO is sure there is > an ME, they should make all data sets available for independent > analysis. 1000 grad students would jump at that. Getting good data is > 70% of a research project. > > > If anyone on the course is reading this, please ask > > John Hagelin why an interupted time series analysis is > > not used to measure the ME. You can tell him that Dr. > > Sun and Fun wants to know. He'll know who I am with > > that comment and probably laugh. > > There is additional, different, "coherence events" through out TMO > history. Superimposition with financial markets can be seen. Some > interesting things. . See second graph down at > http://2006-course-effects.blogspot.com/ > > Again, if the TMO was serious about real ME research, they could > compile the precise data for such coherence events (SIMS wave > initiations, TTCs, citizent sidha courses, large Dome courses, etc.) > and make it available to any reasearcher via internet. I guarantee > 1000 studies would bloom via grad students. And profs looking to publish. >
