Thanks for the link.
In recent years there have been a number of times when I felt that an upcoming event would be synced, for reasons that related to earlier syncs. I would say that over 90 percent of the time the event unfolded in ways that seemed synced or non-random.
As I recently said I think that academia needs flexibility in this study , owing to the possibility that syncs are designs, in which case it is not academias place to set rigid test parameters since the designs must unfold as the designer sees fit.
That said I think there is another way of approaching this mystery, by looking to superlative events and seeing if they tend to display more non random data than other like events.
Superlative events have an objective reality as such, owing to consensus opinion. That's important, because it answers the concern that one is being arbitrary in saying that a given event was exceptionally noteworthy etc.
This kind of approach answers, in its own way, what Sinclair's study lacked, the ability to confirm the facts.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05-Nov-18 02:17 by Poster Boy.