Nice start but I think you should elaborate on this topic a bit more just so we get a clearer understanding on how this works.
You guys got it wrong on how the webbots work. It would make some of the other things you say on this site more credible, but it just shows that you are also possessed of a half baked research—-GIGO. Your stuff on solar flares is not too convincing either, uh..well things haven't gone the way the scientists said they should for this cycle ,uh but I'm sure they know what they're talking about..uh,yeah, they'll get it right next year. OK. Sure.
Care to elaborate?
Seeing as this is the page for Web.bot, let's start there. Whereabouts have we erred?
You come on this website acting all high and mighty and trying to discredit the information provided on it, yet you offer no counter evidence or argument. Of course that wouldn't be as easy as just playing the "you are wrong" card now would it? Simply put, offer some counter evidence or argument or your words are useless.
“In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.” - Oscar Wilde
We quote Clif High:
From 1997 to 2001 I deduced some of the following principals: All people are psychic. Most don’t know it. Even if you do know it, it does not impact the next statement I’m going to make, which is: That all humans leak out these psychic impressions in the language that they choose to use in ordinary conversation. And that was my basic premise to begin with.
Clif High thinks that 'psychic impressions' leak onto the internet and that he can make predictions based on that. I think Clif High hasn't shown that his program can do this: He hasn't shown that people have 'psychic impressions', and that he hasn't shown that they 'leak' this in the kinds of language that they use, and he hasn't shown that his program can successfully mine the internet and glean these 'psychic impressions'. In short, I think he's full of it.
Tell me where we are wrong then.
uh..well things haven't gone the way the scientists said they should for this cycle ,uh but I'm sure they know what they're talking about..uh,yeah, they'll get it right next year. OK. Sure.
This above just makes you look like a tool before you've even brought any type of argument to the table. I notice this has been a bit of a hit and run post so far, I'll patiently wait for your response to any of our posts. I'm thinking something along the lines of "uh….you're wrong coz, uh…I said so and uh…that's it."
The great thing about science is, it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That is how it usually goes.
“In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.” - Oscar Wilde
OK you give a try. Try to predict something using webbot that will happen in the next 3 months.
Predict something that is distinct and and very clear. (No earth quakes or bad weather or any other fuzzy claim that happens every time)
e.g. SpaceX Dragon to be launched on feb 7 will fail on the second stage and fall into the sea.
e.g. The euro millions on the 1st March will be won by by an Irish banker called George.