home
The author's most conclusive validation of Theomatics, as of late 2001, is apparently __A Statistical and Probability Analysis: Luke 15:10-32__. It is an in-depth analysis of the occurrence of the Theomatic phenomenon in the
story of the Prodigal Son. The author has observed that a significant proportion of the sums of phrases referring to one of the two sons is divisible by 90. He presents his detailed scientific analysis of the probability that such
an event could have occurred randomly, finding it to be very, very small. The author has clearly stated that the Luke 15 reference is unimpeachable and impregnable from a mathematical and statistical perspective. He
states in personal correspondence: "You will find that analysis absolutely fool proof and impossible to debunk. The odds, after the most conservative exhaustion of every single mathematical possibility, is 261 million to one." He
states further, "I think you will find it convincing and totally impregnable to any significant rebuttal." This result would initially be considered significant in any defense of Theomatics simply due to the force
of this claim. We were convinced that this work was the author's very best presentation of Theomatics when we began our investigation. Our findings, after
spending significant time and effort in reviewing this work, are presented below. __Boldness__ We find the boldness of the author's claim to be unreasonable, actually inspired by an *hypothetical
* event that has never actually been observed... a fact that the author freely admits in his analysis of the event.
**Errors**
Initially granting the author the appropriateness of imagining this *hypothetical *Theomatic event, and the liberty to base his claims for statistical significance upon it, we find that he has made six errors in his analysis
which inflate his results one thousand fold.
__WLA__
The assumptions intrinsic to imagining this hypothetical event are examined and shown to be invalid, demonstrating that the author contradicts his own observations of Theomatic behavior as well as fundamental concepts in probability. The actual results of this experiment are shown to be remarkably random, with odds of
**1 in 589**, expected on average in each and every such experiment, conclusively invalidating the author's claims.
**Testing**
We present results of testing the author's text of Luke 15 according to proposed phrase construction rules, consider the affects of apparently arbitrary alterations made by the author to the text, and compare results with other editions of the Greek New Testament. All results clearly indicate randomness in this Theomatic instance. No Theomatic significance is observed for any factor at all.
**The Challenge Met**
The author formally presents his standing challenge to us, that being his standard challenge generally presented in his publications to anyone skeptical of his claims. The challenge is simply to produce results comparable to his in a clearly random environment as evidence that his published Theomatic results are not statistically significant. We have done so. Our answer to his challenge is presented for evaluation and reflection.
**Response** We evaluate the author's response to our research and conclusions.
home top |