• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

StopSylviaBrowne - Your Help With 1997 Predictions

WORLD-07: Tourism is at an all-time high. Airlines commit to the lowest rates ever for travel.

query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9505E1D71F38F93AA25752C0A961958260

Headline - Airline Tax Expires But Fliers Still Pay

So the commitment to the lowest rates ever for travel didn't start early in the year to say the least.

Years later:

aviationacrossamerica.org/uploads/File/Airlines_Playbook_1997-2007.pdf

So I'm not seeing any evidence that they changed their ways with some sort of public pressure. Best guess is that the talk of lower to no taxes hit the her ear and she made the prediction that they would pass the tax cut along to the flyer. Turns out they pocketed the difference.
 
HEALT-05: There are two unidentified virus breakouts which attack the liver and lungs and seem to be impervious to antibiotics.

I think we have to class this one as "Already Known" since I am pretty sure that there is no way for a virus to be affected by an antibiotic.
 
WORLD-07: Tourism is at an all-time high. Airlines commit to the lowest rates ever for travel.

query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9505E1D71F38F93AA25752C0A961958260

Headline - Airline Tax Expires But Fliers Still Pay

So the commitment to the lowest rates ever for travel didn't start early in the year to say the least.

Years later:

aviationacrossamerica.org/uploads/File/Airlines_Playbook_1997-2007.pdf

So I'm not seeing any evidence that they changed their ways with some sort of public pressure. Best guess is that the talk of lower to no taxes hit the her ear and she made the prediction that they would pass the tax cut along to the flyer. Turns out they pocketed the difference.

Headline - Airline Tax Expires But Fliers Still Pay

(I think because of your post count that URL didn't go through, so I attempted to fix it. The pdf link works fine for me.)
 
Yeah, I need a few more posts before I can put in a url and make it work.

But anyways, some more easy ones:

WORLD-10: There will be more bombings. A commercial airline leaving Egypt could be at risk in April.
WORLD-11: Government buildings, especially in Chicago and New York, are at risk to be bombed or a threat of bombing in May.
WORLD-12: A mall, perhaps the mall in Minnesota, could be at risk of a bomb in June.

Too vague to be meaningful.

10 - Depends on the definition of more. Does this mean the comparitive number of bombs will go up or does just one bomb which increases the count equate to more? It's simply too vague. Given the international flavor of the next predition, that an airliner leaving Egypt could be at risk doesn't even require it to go boom. Just the threat of risk is enough and there really is no way of knowing if that happened or even how many times someone has planned it and not followed through.

11 - Government buildings are always at risk. It's like saying people are at risk of being hit by a car when crossing the street. It's almost always going to be true and the fact that you don't get hit doesn't change the fact that you were at risk.

12 - Too vague to be meaningful. No bombs, as far as I can tell, blew up so the actual threat didn't materialize. The phrases, however, doesn't require real threats but mearly risk. Someone planning a bombing of the Mall of America would technically put the mall at risk as far as a fortune teller would claim but there is no objective way to measure that risk.
 
Last edited:
HEALT-04: There will be extensive breakthroughs on heart patients. A type of sounding, likened to high-powered radio waves, will break down plaque in arteries.
Either WRONG (radio wave specific) or ALREADY KNOWN

There have been ultrasound treatments for atherosclerosis in development for decades:

Source Here
From a 1997 article, emphasis mine
Catheter-Based Ultrasound Thrombolysis
Shake, Rattle, and Reperfuse
Paul G. Yock, MD; Peter J. Fitzgerald, MD, PhD
the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford (Calif) University Medical School.
(C) 1997 AHA Inc


Correspondence to Paul G. Yock, MD, Acting Chief, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, H3554, Stanford University Medical Center

The potential for using therapeutic ultrasound to treat atherosclerosis and thrombosis has been appreciated for decades (...) first conceived and patented in the 1960s. (...) Experimental work began in the early 1970s (...) growth of angioplasty in the 1980s that brought attention, funding, and real momentum to the development of therapeutic catheter ultrasound.

It's interesting that this hasn't amounted to much today. The current surgical treatments (according to the Mayo Clinic) are angioplasty (deposit compression + stent), laser angioplasty, endarterectomy (surgical removal), thrombolytic therapy (directly applied medication) and bypass surgery.

As for "radio waves", there is limited info in PubMed (pubmed.gov) on any artery treatments involving EM waves of any sort. Most of the information is related to the effect of EM on different medical conditions and there's a wealth of research on using different types of EM to diagnose heart/arterial conditions.
 
WORLD-05: There is a freeze on Oriental importing and exporting

I'm not even sure how that would work.

Does this include every Asian country at once? That's WRONG: See the millions traded w/ China in 1997:
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html#1997

Or would just one "Oriental" country count? ALREADY KNOWN: http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5790.html#1997
Since the USA already had an import embargo on North Korea.

Or is this suggesting a change in the list of embargoed countries? I can't find any, but I'm not going through the hundreds of countries the USA trades with. There were certainly no significant changes to our major trade partners and no events in 1997 seem to suggest any sudden trade changes in the Pacific Rim.

Finally, consider the recent lead paint and food issues with China, there were certainly limited restrictions, but no overall "freeze".
 
# HEALT-10: UV rays become even stronger and are at a greater risk of causing more skin cancer and eye problems.

Going in, this just seems to make sense and not much of a prediction at all.

In finding a link or two, this pdf states (http://www.biospherical.com/NSF/.\presentations\poster_Korea2.pdf) "Moreover, the 1998 measurements at McMurdo station [Antarctica] have also shown the highest UV levels since monitoring began in 1988." It also states "the ozone hole may have a direct impact on locations far away from Antarctica." I tried to find something about UV light in the US but couldn't; "far away from Antarctica" may or may not mean the US.

But interestingly the World Health Organization's faq on UV light (http://www.who.int/uv/faq/whatisuv/en/index1.html) has this to say: "The incidence of different types of skin cancer has been growing dramatically over the past decades. Some people claim that this is due to ozone depletion and enhanced levels of UV. However, most evidence now suggests that the major cause for the increased cancer rates is altered behaviour rather than ozone depletion."

Conclusion: "UV rays become even stronger" is right for Antarctica, the prediction may also be right if we (perhaps generously) extend it to the United States. But, I'm still not sure what kind of prediction it is. Even at the time, the ozone was known to be in danger. The late 80s saw the signing of the Montreal Protocol (to reduce the use of CFCs) and it was revised throughout the 90s.

The meat of the prediction, however, that it is "causing more skin cancer and eye problems" even though it would also seem common sense, is curiously wrong.

# HEALT-11: Hair loss among males and females is also at an all-time high because of the ozone layer breaking down.

I couldn't find any reports that tracked the number of cases of hair loss. As my search went on, I couldn't help but wonder how absurd it seemed anyway. If anything, there could be more bald folks because people are living longer and all that.

In any event, I couldn't find anything that corelated hair loss to UV radiation (apart from a rare inherited disease, trichothiodystrophy http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00006C17-E41D-1C5A-B882809EC588ED9F&sc=I100322). In fact, although not sourced, this site claims "Ultraviolet radiation can also aid in the treatment of chronic skin diseases, such as psoriasis and alopecia areata and resulting hair loss." This is mentioned with respect to UV radiation helping the body producing Vitamin D. http://www.ecology.com/ecology-today/antartica-ozone-hole/index.html

Beyond that (or perhaps related to), I found several mentions of a treatment to stimulate hair growth and/or prevent hair loss with infrared and UV light. (Here is one: http://www.hairlossexpert.co.uk/InfraRedUVLightTreatments.html )

Conclusion: I'd call the first bit about it being at an "all-time high" unverifiable, or just common sense, and that the cause is the ozone is wrong, even if there were an increase.
 
WORLD-01: The US economy continues to recover over the next two years.

The only real tool available to judge the economy is the GDP.

(still no linking yet) bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp

chart - is linked as "Percent change from preceding period (Excel • 31KB)"

The problem is the wording of the prediction. The economy had already recovered and was growing at a respectable 4-6%
Year %
1994 6.2
1995 4.6
1996 5.7
1997 6.2
1998 5.3
1999 6.0
2000 5.9

So the economy had continued on at the pace it had continued on and since it had already recovered the prediction is wrong where not invalid. In short, the economy improved for 3 years (not 2) but the recovery period of the economy had long since ended.
 
WEATH-08: Mexico is in for a 6.4 earthquake in May. Very devastating.
Wrong:
1997 quakes:
# 1997 12 05 - Near East Coast of Kamchatka - M 7.8
# 1997 10 14 - South of Fiji Islands - M 7.8
# 1997 09 26 - Central Italy - M 6.4 Fatalities 11
# 1997 07 09 - Near Coast of Venezuela - M 7.0
# 1997 05 21 - Jabalpur, India - M 5.8 Fatalities 38
# 1997 05 10 - Northern Iran - M 7.3 Fatalities 1,567

Major Quakes in Mexico:
# 1965 08 23 - Oaxaca, Mexico - M 7.3 Fatalities 6
# 1968 08 02 - Oaxaca, Mexico - M 7.1 Fatalities 18
# 1979 10 15 - Imperial Valley, Mexico - California Border - M 6.4
# 1985 09 19 - Michoacan, Mexico - M 8.0 Fatalities 9,500
# 1999 06 15 - Central Mexico - M 7.0


Actually, RIGHT, within reason. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
 
It hails every year in Tornado alley, so this is part COMMON SENSE. As for unusual hail, I cannot find anything to suggest she's not WRONG
From: http://www.spc.noaa.gov/archive/


# Hail warnings in June, Iowa and Kansas
June 1995: Iowa=11, Kansas=128
June 1996: Iowa=54, Kansas=272
June 1997: Iowa=51, Kansas=178
June 1998: Iowa=75, Kansas=288


Tirdun, I tried to go through the archives, but it was hopeless for me. Anyway, the prediction was for Idaho, but you listed Iowa. And I'm unable to get the Idaho results as you probably can. :boggled:
 
"HEALT-13: We keep cutting our forest, and more and more viruses are let loose."

This could appear to be a two part prediction. However, she links the two together, and thats a telling point. There is a lot of literature on the Ebola and other viruses, and the impact of the deforestation of the rainforeston it's spread.

#1: "We keep cutting our forest" - The specific point is what she means by "forest". Does she mean the Rainforest, in which case it is ALREADY KNOWN. If she means humans are cutting trees in general to use them, then that too is ALREADY KNOWN.

#2: "more and more viruses are let loose" - Using the theory that she means Rainforests, then this is ALREADY KNOWN/COMMON SENSE.

I was able to find three sources, which reference either research done prior to 1996 (1990), or list outbreaks of viruses back to 1967. It would not be hard to find more.

http://www.geocities.com/mockturtl/index.html "Examining the link between deforestation and the emergence of Ebola virus"

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-66681237.html "Killers Without Cures"

But the best reference is as follows, which is actually published 1997, but references the following: "The most comprehensive global survey of the effects of deforestation on infectious disease rates remains a 1993 article published in a supplement to volume 106 of the journal Parasitology , written by researchers at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (LSTM)."

http://www.ehponline.org/qa/105-11focus/

Therefore, her prediction is ALREADY KNOWN.
 
Last edited:
HEALT-11 Hair loss among males and females is also at an all-time high because of the ozone layer breaking down.

At first I thought, "What the heck does the ozone layer have to do with hair loss?!?"


As it turns out, nothing.

May I present state's evidence A. Please pay particular attention to question 15, to which the answer (given at the bottom) is "b".

State's evidence B shows that in 1997, the hole in the ozone layer actually shrank over the previous year by 1.83 million square kilometers. That is to say, the ozone layer was building up that year, not breaking down.


Sylvia is WRONG.

The defense rests.
 
Last edited:
Another link about Liz Taylor's- it should be pointed out- benign brain tumor:

http://edition.cnn.com/SHOWBIZ/9702/18/liz.taylor/index.html

Please be sure to point out that in 1997, Miss. Taylor was 65 years old and getting older, making "her health getting worse" quite probable. :rolleyes: Doesn't take much psychic powers to predict any given 65-year-old woman isn't going to become healthier. :rolleyes:

She was already very well known for her health problems, as evidenced by this Onion article published in March of 1997:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/29947

Here's a little more about it:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...rence/Times Topics/People/T/Taylor, Elizabeth

"Over the years, Ms. Taylor has struggled with respiratory, cardiac and orthopedic problems, and recently, she had both hips replaced."

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2004-11-30-taylor-heart_x.htm
 
WORLD-09: Uprising of great magnitude occurs in Russia. This promotes the rise of Communism again in August and September.

Little background first. Russia in 1996 was a mess. Sure, it's a mess today but it's really a mess back then. A small state known as Chechnya had sought independance in the usual method and won it. There was some considerable noise being made about this not being allowed to happen in the good old days. This might be the cause of such predictions. However, no uprising of a great magnitude took place in russia if we assume that news agencies would cover a great uprising. Can't link to what doesn't exist. Russia didn't restart the campaign in Chechnya until 1999.

Second part, the rise of communism. It's hard to impossible to track down the rise and fall of a political party not in power on a month to month basis anywhere. It's just not tracked that closely in an off election year and 1997 was an off election year. So lets look at the results of the national elections in 1996, the year before the rise.

www2 dot essex.ac.uk/elect/electer/rus_prelr.htm

I really need to up my post count. Moving on:

Election is done in two stages with a run-off. For the sake of brevity I'm only including the winner and the leading Communist.

Boris N. El’tsin 40,202,349 54.39%
Gennadii A. Zyuganov 30,104,589 40.73%

A rise in communism would fundamentally change the landscape of politics in Russia. 2000:

Vladimir V. Putin 39,740,467 53.44%
Gennadii A. Zyuganov KPRF 21,928,468 29.49%

While politics are fickle, the leading Communist lost 10% of his base in 4 years. The rise, if any, in those two months was so inconsequencial if it even existed that it didn't matter if it occured so the reason to mention it seems rather questionable. This doesn't disprove the rise, just the value of the rise if it were to occur. The only result can be unknowable.
 
Actually, RIGHT, within reason. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

I wonder why that doesn't appear on the other list. Grr. It's not a particularly useful tool if it isn't accurate.

'm curious why she's so fixated on Mexican Earthquakes (other than the fact that Mexico is on the Pacific Rim).
 
Last edited:
Tirdun, I tried to go through the archives, but it was hopeless for me. Anyway, the prediction was for Idaho, but you listed Iowa. And I'm unable to get the Idaho results as you probably can. :boggled:

Gah. Picked the wrong state :blush:

New stats:
# Hail warnings in June, IDAHO and Kansas
June 1995: Idaho=11, Kansas=128
June 1996: Idaho=13, Kansas=272
June 1997: Idaho=4, Kansas=178
June 1998: Idaho=24, Kansas=288

It looks like 1997 was a light year for Idaho and a typical year for Kansas.

To get this info, you have to go to this page and select the hail warning data file at the bottom. It's a big CSV file, so download it and use Excel/ooCalc to convert it. Col 3/C is the state FIPS ID, 16 is IDAHO (19 is Iowa) and 20 is Kansas. Column 6/F is the date and 7/G is the time. There's a word document on that same page with the rest of the column information. The majority of the columns are for tracking tornado warnings, but since hail follows tornadoes, this is the best data archive I could find.
 
Last edited:
Just wanted to thank everyone, and say "keep going!" I hope to spend some tmie correlating it all this coming weekend.
 
WORLD-10: There will be more bombings. A commercial airline leaving Egypt could be at risk in April.
WORLD-11: Government buildings, especially in Chicago and New York, are at risk to be bombed or a threat of bombing in May.
WORLD-12: A mall, perhaps the mall in Minnesota, could be at risk of a bomb in June.

I think Christine R's post was referring to these. But the tricky way these are worded makes them RIGHT, or perhaps COMMON SENSE in the case of the Minnesota mall. I could find no evidence of any actual specific threats in any of these areas in 1997, although these predictions came on the heels of the Oklahoma city bombing and there was a lot of talk in the media at that time about the Minnesota Mall of America being at risk, etc. But to say "at risk" or "could be at risk"...well, sure they could. :rolleyes:

HEALT-09: Skin rashes that defy diagnosis are also prevalent.

Came up empty on this one. Apparently there's not a lot of data on skin rashes in the 1990s. Maybe someone else (a dermatologist?!) might have better luck.
 
Sorry, just realized Leftus had already addressed the bombing predictions too.

HEALT-02: A combination of amino acids and vegetable enzymes will be introduced to help diabetes.

The question is, introduced by who?

And "help diabetes" is sufficiently vague. I could find nothing to indicate that anything remarkable of this nature was being recommended by physicians as of 1997, although certainly a nutritional or vitamin supplement of this type might have been released, or some type of alternative medicine formulation.

As far as I know, physicians are still prescribing diabetics who aren't diet-controlled some form of insulin or something such as glyburide or metformin to this day.
 

Back
Top Bottom