Premonitions of Disasters

[Rodney]

Note: This thread is an outgrowth of this thread on the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology forum.

My mistake; a 727 rather than a 737. Still, not specific enough to actually identify one particular type.
Also, the article (and probably people in general) seem to think the FAA is a monolithic block. It isn't. Ask two different Flight Service District Offices the same question and you're likely to get five different answers.

Are you a pilot, or do you work for the FAA?

I hate to admit it, but there are woo pilots and administrators. Booth managed to get in touch with one. Am I shocked? No.

What do you think the FAA official's reaction should have been to Booth's phone call?

Am I surprised that Playboy did an article on it? No. They lost an editor and a regular contributor in that crash. Adding a psychic angle to it made a good story.

Actually, Playboy lost three people: "Judith Wax perished along with her husband, Sheldon Wax. Judith Wax frequently contributed to Playboy (of which Sheldon was managing editor), notably the annual 'Christmas cards' piece that 'presented' short satirical poems to various public figures. It was reported at the time that in her 1979 book Starting in the Middle, she had talked about her fear of flying. The magazine's fiction editor Vicki Haider also lost her life in the crash." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191

 

[Rodney]

From the other thread:

What does that have to do with anything, unless we already know that uncommon experiences cannot be caused by natural processes?

The point is that some people are always making predictions, and so they're bound to be at least generally accurate occasionally. I don't see any evidence that, prior to May 22, 1979, David Booth had called the FAA or any other organization to report a dream, or saw himself as a psychic.

A prospective, rather than retrospective, observation, and observations that are so specific as to make a match highly improbable would be a start.

Linda

In Booth's case, what would have been convincing to you? Would he have had to identify the plane's registration number, as suggested by TjW?

 

[TjW]

Note: This thread is an outgrowth of this thread on the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology forum.

Are you a pilot, or do you work for the FAA?


What do you think the FAA official's reaction should have been to Booth's phone call?


Actually, Playboy lost three people: "Judith Wax perished along with her husband, Sheldon Wax. Judith Wax frequently contributed to Playboy (of which Sheldon was managing editor), notably the annual 'Christmas cards' piece that 'presented' short satirical poems to various public figures. It was reported at the time that in her 1979 book Starting in the Middle, she had talked about her fear of flying. The magazine's fiction editor Vicki Haider also lost her life in the crash." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191

Yes, I'm a pilot.

As soon as it was established that there was no actual identifiable aircraft, he should have been politely thanked and hung up on.

Oh. Once again you're right and I'm wrong. Having lost three, rather than just two people associated with the magazine would obviously make Playboy completely uninterested in covering the story.

The point is that some people are always making predictions, and so they're bound to be at least generally accurate occasionally. I don't see any evidence that, prior to May 22, 1979, David Booth had called the FAA or any other organization to report a dream, or saw himself as a psychic.

I have a watch that stopped running some time ago. Nevertheless, it's right twice a day. Would you suggest I rely on it to schedule an airline?

 

[fls]

From the other thread:

The point is that some people are always making predictions, and so they're bound to be at least generally accurate occasionally. I don't see any evidence that, prior to May 22, 1979, David Booth had called the FAA or any other organization to report a dream, or saw himself as a psychic.

I don't know that one has much to do with the other. It wasn't much of a prediction - he seems to have envisioned a fairly generic plane crash. And whether you have many individuals making a few predictions, or a few people making many predictions, you still expect at least some (if not the majority) to be accurate.

In Booth's case, what would have been convincing to you? Would he have had to identify the plane's registration number, as suggested by TjW?

That would be a good example - that his dream provided a detail so specific as to be highly improbable otherwise (banking before crashing is obviously not improbable) and that this detail was documented prior to the crash. Although, that would have buggered up the events, since identifying the plane beforehand would have (probably) prevented the crash.

Linda

 

[dudalb]

Rodney has become one of the more persistent Woo Merchants around here.
For my own money, Even if a phenenmenon like precognition exists (and I have seen no real evidence that it does) the examples given to prove it show that at best it is a "Wild talent", unreliable and uncontrollable, and therefore useless for any practical use.
But then throwing out solid science in favor of some bizarre belief is a standard practice of the Woo Woos.

 

[Rodney]

Yes, I'm a pilot.

As soon as it was established that there was no actual identifiable aircraft, he should have been politely thanked and hung up on.

Even if the plane could have been pinned down to being an American Airlines DC-10 leaving O'Hare on May 25, 1979? (Booth's dream wasn't that specific, but what if it had been?)

Oh. Once again you're right and I'm wrong. Having lost three, rather than just two people associated with the magazine would obviously make Playboy completely uninterested in covering the story.

You're now sounding like my dear friend Garrette. I was just trying to be factually accurate, but I actually appreciate you highlighting the Playboy connection. Some casual readers might wonder why Playboy would have written such an article.

I have a watch that stopped running some time ago. Nevertheless, it's right twice a day. Would you suggest I rely on it to schedule an airline?

Hmmm, from what I've heard about certain JFK Airport routes, that might be just as well.

 

[Rodney]

That would be a good example - that his dream provided a detail so specific as to be highly improbable otherwise (banking before crashing is obviously not improbable) and that this detail was documented prior to the crash. Although, that would have buggered up the events, since identifying the plane beforehand would have (probably) prevented the crash.

Linda

Suppose Booth's dream had included the plane's registration number and the crash had been averted. I suspect that the general reaction in these forums would have been along the lines of: "Obviously, there is more than meets the eye here. Booth must have had inside information about the number one engine on that American Airlines DC-10 not being properly secured."

 

[Rodney]

Rodney has become one of the more persistent Woo Merchants around here.

Thank you.

For my own money, Even if a phenenmenon like precognition exists (and I have seen no real evidence that it does) the examples given to prove it show that at best it is a "Wild talent", unreliable and uncontrollable, and therefore useless for any practical use.

Suppose it can be established that precognition is a "Wild Talent." Would that not alter your worldview?

But then throwing out solid science in favor of some bizarre belief is a standard practice of the Woo Woos.

I'm not throwing out solid science, just attempting to build on it.

 

[schlitt]

Suppose Booth's dream had included the plane's registration number and the crash had been averted. I suspect that the general reaction in these forums would have been along the lines of: "Obviously, there is more than meets the eye here. Booth must have had inside information about the number one engine on that American Airlines DC-10 not being properly secured."

Pure speculation on your part. I disagree, specific details would certainly make this case worth investigating.


Why did his dream not include these details?

Do you have the statistics on how many people dream about a plane crash per day?

Do you have statistics on how many times people contact transport agencies warning them of a future tragedy?

Do you have the statistics of correlation between a pre warning, and an actual event?

There is no evidence to show this was any more than a coincidence. And in fact due to the fuzzy information given before the event, which was clearly retrofitted, venturing into certainty of conclusion would be a fallacy.

Rodney, the most logical thing to do with this case is to chalk it up to; “It may have been a supernatural event, or it may have been a coincidence, we cannot know for sure. We will have to look elsewhere for concrete evidence of premonitions.”

 

[Rodney]

Pure speculation on your part. I disagree, specific details would certainly make this case worth investigating.

So Booth's identical dream over 10 consecutive nights of an American Airlines DC-10 or 737 nose-diving into a field was not specific enough to be worth investigating?

Why did his dream not include these details?

For whatever reason, premonitions rarely include all details.

Do you have the statistics on how many people dream about a plane crash per day?

Do you have statistics on how many times people contact transport agencies warning them of a future tragedy?

Do you have the statistics of correlation between a pre warning, and an actual event?

No, do you have any relevant statistics?

There is no evidence to show this was any more than a coincidence. And in fact due to the fuzzy information given before the event, which was clearly retrofitted, venturing into certainty of conclusion would be a fallacy.

What is the evidence that the information was retrofitted?

Rodney, the most logical thing to do with this case is to chalk it up to; “It may have been a supernatural event, or it may have been a coincidence, we cannot know for sure. We will have to look elsewhere for concrete evidence of premonitions.”

That's a surprisingly objective assessment, although I'm not sure a premonitory dream would necessarily qualify as a supernatural event.

 

[schlitt]

So Booth's identical dream over 10 consecutive nights of an American Airlines DC-10 or 737 nose-diving into a field was not specific enough to be worth investigating?

Er, hang on a second. Is it documented he stated that it was one of those two crafts specifically?

How do we know what was retrofitted to fit his statements and what was not?

How do we know that his dreams were not purely coincidence?

Plenty of people have recurring dreams.

How do we now these dreams were not triggered by a regular flight traveling over his house at the time he was generally in the R.E.M stage of sleep. The sound of the descending flight, which often sounds odd (like a bomb dropping and whistling) triggering a dream about a crash?

There is nothing about this to elevate if from a mere status of possible coincidence. To do so we need to eliminate the possibility of alternate explanations. Since we are unable to do this to a satisfactory level, the possibilities remain open to this event. It may have been paranormal, it may not. Given no replication and the high chance of coincidence, rushing into a belief of the paranormal due to this matter would be foolhardy.

For whatever reason, premonitions rarely include all details.

Isn't the reason fairly obvious? - They are not premonitions, they are retrofitted coincidences.
For every premonition that apparently is correct, there are countless ones that are forgotten about because a similar future event does not happen. We hear about the ones that coincidentally happen to fit a circumstance, which seems to validate the premonition.

No, do you have any relevant statistics?

No, why should I? I am not trying to prove anything.

What is the evidence that the information was retrofitted?

Saying "A large plane" = a specific aircraft is classic retrofitting. With no documented evidence of what his actual statements are, the opportunity for retrofitting is abundant. Add to this the fallibility of human memory, and the opportunity for emotional bias due to wonderment at a possible coincidence, and you have a situation ripe for retrofitting.

That's a surprisingly objective assessment, although I'm not sure a premonitory dream would necessarily qualify as a supernatural event.

Predicting the future is firmly planted in the supernatural category.

 

[arthwollipot]

Lurking...

 

[Beerina]

Lurking...

I predicted that!



I just didn't wanna post my prediction because I didn't think the general population could handle that knowledge.

 

[Jackalgirl]

I just wanted to point out that:

If this guy had had very specific dreams -- I mean, dreaming the tail number, the exact date and time, the exact location...well then, sure, it'd be pretty good evidence that some kind of precognition was going on.

If I have just lifted my cat up using only the powers of my mind and are now waving her about (gently, of course, I love my cat), that'd also be pretty good evidence of telekinesis.

The question is: did Booth have dreams that were that specific?

I have not, by the way, picked up my cat using the powers of my mind. She's sitting in front of the screen door ignoring me completely.

 

[arthwollipot]

The problem is that with an event like this it would be very difficult to verify that anything was going on. We have only anecdotal reports of an uncontrolled situation.

Is it possible that Booth had a genuine premonition? Of course.

We can't really make a determination either way unless we can study the phenomenon under controlled conditions. And by the sounds of it, that would be very difficult to do, as it seems to happen spontaneously and without conscious control.

 

[leon_heller]

Rodney has become one of the more persistent Woo Merchants around here.
For my own money, Even if a phenenmenon like precognition exists (and I have seen no real evidence that it does) the examples given to prove it show that at best it is a "Wild talent", unreliable and uncontrollable, and therefore useless for any practical use.
But then throwing out solid science in favor of some bizarre belief is a standard practice of the Woo Woos.

I've started calling him "Plonker" when I respond to him on a thread I started. I don't like using ridicule, but it's the only way to deal with someone like him.

What is a "plonker"? There was a very funny and popular sitcom on BBC TV some years ago called "Only Fools and Horses". One of the main characters was a rather stupid youth called Rodney, whose much smarter older brother was always calling him a "plonker" or a "dipstick": English slang words for a penis. Dipstick is cockney rhyming slang, of course.

Leon

 

[Complexity]

Woo.

 

[Rodney]

Woo.

Thank you (and your new running buddy Leon) for your profound contributions to this thread.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Thank you (and your new running buddy Leon) for your profound contributions to this thread.

Woo. Woo.

 

[gdnp]

Precognition is not significantly different than the other claims of psychics to predict the future, except for one thing: psychics claim to have an ability that persists, whereas precognition can be a "one-off" type of thing. Therefore, psychics can at least be tested, whereas precognition will at best be anecdotal.

Almost certainly, incidents are coincidence. Therefore, I see no reason why any responsible agency should take any action based on someone's dream or vision.