False accusation ratio: Catholic priests and alien abductions

The False Accusation Ratio

Catholic Priests and Alien Abductions

(cir 2014 with updates)

An equation predicts False Accusations' based on the 'word popularity' of the victim. This was discovered in a study of false reports against "space alien"s who are often accused of abducting people (then letting them go). The Numbers say that Catholic priests and celebrities are victims of a common neuro-statistical phenomenon of false reports.


2022 update:
The data were since compared to publicly known 'messy guilty' serial killers and the results were completely different. Serial killers did not match predictions of fame or number of victims. The only corrilation was their fame after-the-fact. And there the ratio suggested a value aproximate to the number of "crime editors". And this number grew from about 850 in the 60s to about 3 times that in the 90s. This was tried with concatinated name popularity and non-concatinated name populatiry in the same manner as prediction method below.
The comparison forms a stark contrast with eyewitness celeb trials without smoking guns, such as photographs of body counts or physical violence etc.


How many?
The most compregencive longitudinal report on UFO activity since the 40s found 1,700 UFO (Abduction) reports (and 14,600 sightings). (from roughly 1936 to 1998) This was the most comprehensive report at the time. (cir 2015).
The original ufo report is no longer maintained online. However, the numbers were noted and were confirmed from the "NUFORC" database on alien "sightings". (approximately 14,600 'reported sightings' during that time. It matched.)
How Popular?
The term "space alien" on google ngram viewer. (Search google ngram) and "space alien" is .000002 of American English in 2008. Not too popular. But enough to garner 1,700 accusations in the prior 50 years.

I hypothesied was that this is a random phenomenon in which people simply attack stuff that bounces around in their head. (Since twinkle lights in the sky never really bother anyone.) So I looked up the term "Cosby". Its a single concept in our society, though there are a few people with that name. He is sometimes called "The Coz" but that is rare.

The popularity of "Cosby" in American English was .000000075. (average from 2000-2007)
Doing the math,

1,700 divided by .000002 times .000000075 = 63.7 (accusers)   


This matched. Cosby had 60 female accusers. And I suppose, two lawyers and a judge. But is it correct? Did he simply offer his dates drinks and stuff before they had drunk sex? Did stuff that was not criminal in 2013 (when first reported) become criminal when a legalistic mob became excited about drunk sex? A crime in Sweden, but generally, just sloppy love in most of the world.
Cosby has now been released because 
the court admitted lots of unrelated past 
deed stories testimony which were essentially 
not relavant to innocence or guilt. *


To test this I looked at The weinestein Case. But I could not find a term that summed up the Film producer, Hollywood producer or individual person. Wienstien was behind the scenes. He made movies. But Cosby was a front man. You went to see him. Wienstien was not "The Stein" or "Mr. Film". There was no term like "cosby".

What I did find was the term "Hollywood" but that could mean things other than Wienstien. In fact it could be other people (one dimension) and other things (another dimension). And I found that "Hollywood / (2 Pi)" would satisfy the same equation.
Alien 'abduction' (accusations)
divided by "space alien" times
"hollywood/2Pi" gives,

1,700 divided by .000002 * .0000001 = 87.9 (predicted)


This also matched the 87 accusers. (plus .9 judges, I suppose)

Note: these numbers seem to change periodically. But the term "Hollywood" cir 1995 (now 1991) divided by 2 Pi gave the number listed.

Here i used the long standing popularity of the word Hollywood, before 1995. (because the internet exaggerates word popularity of show biz) But is the division by 2 PI correct? I guess you would need to take calculus 3 or 4. But the spacial representation of "other things" and "Other people" would produce an arc. So the unit vector should be correct.
Theres no doubt that if you ask people to point at hollywood and Wienstien walked out of a building. Everyone would point at him and say. There's hollywood. Theres funders, scripts, agents, phone calls... Yea Wienstin is hollywood - not the guy on the corner selling pretzels.

Its hard to prove. But, again, there were no police reports, no charges.. no crimes.. until, later, after a lot of people got talking, then grabbed their pitch forks.. (i'm not saying its idealto ask for sex in any situation) But they, later, grabbed their pitch forks and caused far more damage than he ever did, wiping out a career and obviously severely injuring a human life. Did he wipe out careers? You'd have to blame every producer i ever emailed. Maybe you can. Or maybe its the junta of "we don't look at outsider's work". But that's a different matter.

Dividing a term by 2 Pi was iffy. However if Weinstein (the term) is equal in popularity to "Hollywood" then perhaps the frustration of a closed AND freakishly competitive or nepotistic industry (with that EXACT popularity) is what everyone is really upset about. They say its one thing. But the numbers say it's just anger at 'HOLLYWOOD'.

Priests:
So I looked at "Priests". No other profession is so often accused.(in the news media) People don't care about "ministers" or "rabbis" or "buddist monks". They want catholic priests. (Catholics also earn half as much money as the other groups do in the U.S. So they are clearly an oppressed group.)
That link is here: (It was pulled from the web and replaced by lots of scattered data that hides the facts.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/11/how-income-varies- among-u-s-religious-groups/


I looked at the term "priest", "clergy" and "clergyman". But none seemed to fit. Priests were way too popular. That equation would overestimate 8 million accusers out of 109,694 priests. Far too high. I used the church's own exhaustive statistics on priests since the 1950s. It is a well known report.
Report of the Bishops from 1936 onward

I realized that 'priest' is too popular because 'priests' are not like 'space aliens'. They are not twinkling lights in the sky. They're Real. So another term is needed. Like "space" & "alien".
I tried "Priest" squared which gave somewhat more than the number of accusers.
I tried "Clergy" Squared which gave somewhat less.
And I tried "Priest" times "Clergy" which gave about 20% more..

Then I found "Catholic priest" Both an idea and a person.
"Catholic priest" showed a popularity of .0000012 for pre internet 1995, the lowest popularity since 1950.)
Comparing "alien abduction" (accusations)
to "catholic priest" (accusations),
(based on word popularity), gave;

1,700 divided by .000002 times .0000012 = 1020 (predicted alien abduction reports)


This matched exactly. Catholic priests showed 1021 police reports. An error less than 1/10th percent.

We simply don't know how many priests might be abusers. (or how many are abused) And we can't be sure why "space aliens" are also exactly 2/3 more hostile than priests. (1,700/1,021) = 1.665 )

Why are twinkling lights in the sky 66% more hostile than priests? Maybe its easier to accuse an 'idea' than a person. (Or, if you like the new google numbers, then why are priests getting fewer than half the expected false accusations?)



Using Catholic" times "priest" gave exactly 4 times the expected crazy accusations. So "Catholic""priests" are 1/4 as dangerous as twinkle lights in the sky. At other times the Ngram Viewer appears to have showed .000002385 which predicts twice as many false accusations as actually get. So Priests would have half as many police reports as expected. This would make Priests 1/2 as 'abusive' as 'space aliens'. They are very nice people with high public exposure. However the original data did predict 1020 accusations vs the actual 1021 police reports. The equation appears as accurate as the data.

Nasser:
The Larry Nassar case has some numbers worth noting.
Here a doctor was paid to grab patients butts to adjust their back. Early on the girls laughed among themselves how they hated having that done. And joked about the doctor. 15 years later they made the teen joking appear real.

"Nasser" (with an 'e') has a word frequency of about .0000006 in American English (2008 google ngram changed to .0000003 but the median probability of that term is still about .000006). (It is more popular than Nassar with an 'a', but is spoken the same way.) This predicts 510 (alien abduction) accusers. A recent report showed only 333 accusers. (the average word popularity since 1960 of .0000004 predicts 340 false accusers).

As a christian, it makes me wonder why god allows false charges. For instance half of death row was shown to be innocent when DNA testing became available.(statistics also became hard to find after 2008) The Nassar case is similar again in that there was no problem, in fact they paid him for the work, then suddenly in 2014 someone made a complaint and a large mob formed with 333 people suing Michigan State University for a HALF BILLION DOLLARS.

Enough to make anyone want to turn their head and cough.

The Numbers suggest all these cases are the result of vicious mobs of slanderers who appeared out of nowhere. Like the porn on Nassar's computer which seems to have appeared out of nowhere. 37,000 images of kiddy porn. At 2 hours a day, that would take a year to download at a minute per image. About the amount of time between the first accusation in 2014 and the sudden investigation for kiddy porn a year later.

Did he buy the porn on the internet? Is there a secret "free kiddy porn network"? Or was it donated by a well meaning "family protector"?

All the numbers say innocent. All of them.

All the accusers say Give us money. All of them.

R.Kelly:
A recent case arose where famous singer R Kelly was charged. Analysis of his word popularity shows "R" as .0035 and Kelly .000005 Multiplying these together gives R*Kelly = .0000000245
1700 divided by .000002 times .0000000245 = 20.8 Accusers.

The Numbers predict 20 accusers. I do not know how many witnesses will testify against him. But again, It looks like popularity is causing people to report space aliens and other famous people.

I recently checked Wikipedia and counted the number of accusers and companies who cheated him (cancil culture is robery of civil right to equal trade). There were 20. So the equation seems to be perfect.

It is possible that the world is so complex and the numbers of people are so many and counrts are so sketchy and random (50-50 random) that the statistics is simply perfect.


Here we go again:
Jeffery Epstine:
well obviously nobody is permitted to argue that Epstine is innocent. And peer pressure is a bad sign.
So lets look at the numbers.

Jeffrey Epstine was totally unknown. Jeffrey Who?, is all anyone on the street would know. But he was a billionaire playboy. That's what islands and parties are. Just play, when the work is done. (presumably by brokers and lawyers).


Billionaire Playboy as 2 words:
(Please note ngram viewer nolonger works on some browsers. googlized nonstandard htpertext. 2021)

Billionaire has a word frequency of about .000035 and playboy also has about .000048
Not surprizingly, "Billionaire times Playboy" gives;

1700 divided by .000002 times .000035 times .000048 = 1.4 Accusers.


(by all media resports) This is what Epstine had.
He had one 'alien abduction' story (using lawyer induced words). Nobody says 'I was trafficked'. That's lawyer words not victim words.
"just a story".
And this is what he had.
One alien abduction story.(for money, with lawyer induced verbal constructions)
And one copycat lawsuit.(for money, with same lawyer induced constructions)

The facts are undeniable. The math is real.
Aliens are not abducting people (and then letting them go).
Instead, famous people are simply being attacked, at the same rate as the alien "twinkle lights in the sky" (based on their word populatiry).
Interestingly the origional Epstine 'forced confession' did not include any 'sex'. It was "procurement" and "solicitation".
But think. If they couldn't charge any sex, then it wasnt really a sweet heart deal was it?

Billionaire Playboy as one word:
I have since learned that "billionaire playboy" is listed as one word also.
('Billionaire playboy (capitalized) was not on ngram viewer.) The Numbers for 1700 "Alien abduction"s and "billionaire playboy" circa 2004 give about 35 Accusers.
1700 divided by ".000002" times .00000004 =  34 Accusers.
This is the exact amount or people in the origional police investigation listed in the Maxwell Deposition (30 plus the 4 lawyers and judges who attacked him and his long ago ex girlfriend.
The statistics are perfect because there are so many veriables.
If 30 'confessions' bother you, Then see these two links.
Forced confessions have a sucess rate of about 80% and higher on children and higher still when just accusing someone else, or 'going along'.


See: How False confessions work

And

Studies of False Confession and beleifs

The origional police report is online but it was not loading and the audio plays slow. So I could not see or hear it. But the two links above tell a serious story. They are MUST READ links for judges and defence lawyers.

A second calculation regarding Epstein shows that (word frequency of) "rich guy" times (the word frequency of) "rich" yields an average of 31.37 accusers between 2008 and 2019
Cir 2008   "rich guy" = .000006090,  "rich" = .004852 
Cir 2019   "rich guy" = .000008319,  "rich" = .005324

(.0000053) * (.0047) * 1700 (alien abduction reports) / "space alien" (.000002)= 25.11
(.0000083) * (.0053) * 1700 (alien abduction reports) / "space alien" (.000002)= 37.64

The term "rich guy" is relatively common. To be a rich guy, you only need a comfortable life, a nice car and a wristwatch. So "rich guys" are a dime a dozen. But if he's simply "rich", thatís helicopter, airplane and private island mansion. Then he's "rich" and not just a some affluent 'rich guy'.
So Multiplying the frequency of attacks for both together is appropriate because they are multipliers. He's not half "rich" and half "rich guy". Each term influences the entirety of mindset and multiplies the probability of a false accusation.

It is unclear how much people 'thought' "billionaire playboy" or ďrich" "rich guy". So these would have to be averaged with the (34) predicted false accusers from "billionaire playboy". That gives 29.7 accusers for the first lawsuit in 2008. And 35.8 by the time of his death by imprisonment.


Gislane Maxwell:
Having mentioned Maxwell via the Epstein case I found that:

The word popularity of "maxwell" times "girlfriend" gave about 8 Accusers.(this appeared to match the four witnesses, 2 FBI publicist/agents and 2 NY Attorneys.

However, the term "maxwell" times "rich girl" also yielded 1.6 accusers.
So averaging these gives 4.8 accusers. This was the exact number at trial.
A look at the news indicated that accusations amounted to 'suspicions', legal 'massages' or were discredited by Films or Plays which were not actually out until accusers were of "legal age". Great piles of nothing.
This leaves the guy who robbed Epstein(twice), who could not really be considered a witness to anything other than Epsteinís girlfriend having managed a house for him. (apparently displacing everyone down one step in the chain of command and separating them from the money they were later able to get.)

And the .8 appears to represent the judge who felt that a extra juror who lied about past abuse was ok.. and that 11 jurors were enough.

In defense of the rich, A mansion is like owning 20 or 30 Houses. Thatís a lot of pool boys, painters, locksmiths, carpet installers, wallpapers. And who's making dinner for 50 people? Cooks, cooks, cooks, Waiters, waiters, water, bussing, bartenders. There's secretaries, drivers, pilots...mechanics, roofers, plasterers, window cleaners... house keepers, Security services, lawn care, driveway repair... And sauna..

And house workers would likley be asked to do for guests whatever they did for the owner of the house. Shocking for the average person, yes. Open-close the drapes morning-night, change the linnens, clean the bath, scrub the toilet, wash the mirror, change the mat, scrub the shower, pick up food trays, supply drinking water, change towels, wash towels, fold towels, change the flowers, vacume, swiff, straighten paintings, empty trash etc.

More interesting is that Maxwell was both known as a "rich girl" and a "girlfriend". So the average of the two terms predicts the exact number of 4.8 accusers used to justify her life-sentence (murder by concrete box).

Pretty harsh treatment for a crime what wasnít reported by a victim. Rather, the Epstein case appears to have emerged as a roomer through a family member of an alleged victim. And then, Again through a police chief where the case fizzled with an extorted confession. (Forgive the reference but what will it take to make you confess?)

Later, the media published geometrically impossible fake photos (a whole youtube channel was dedicated to those) And the FBI themselves used unrelated photos like a sketch of Maxwell "hanging" on the wall, or a private foot rub (physical contact) with her boyfriend (common-law husband?) to "imply" guilt-through-subliminal-association. Other photos were also subliminal innuendo like an unbuttoned over-shirt or a lawn bench that looked like a childrenís bed.
I know only what I read and see.
There was a fake photo of Maxwell and Trump.(It's doubtful those parties would have wallpaper hung out of alignment. And the photo had missing shadows.)
The media would have to be considered responsible for the deaths of her and her wealthy boyfriend. (multibly extorted to plead guilty to 'improper speeh' and to 'hiering a masseuse') The media marched heavy and fast over the frail footbridge of the court and every possible jury. It it was a bad case, there would be signs everywhere.
But we only know what we read and compute.


Summery:

The data for "Cosby", "Hollywood/2Pi", "Nasser" and "Catholic Priests" AND Jeffrey Epstine appears to confirm The Alien Abduction effect.



False charges are a Fact. They are serious threat to the united states. There is no presumption of innocence. They lock you up right away. Then, they bribe you to confess to lesser charges. For saftey. This happened to Epstine.

I know that false accusations are a problem in America. But words seem useless, so i give you the numbers.

The math I present here is not difficult. But we know from DNA that our justice system is troubled. I hope others can help. Jesus tells us to love our enemies, forgive them and do good to them. But everywhere people are out of control. People jam my search listings, cheat my web listings and paypal transactions. They pirate my patent (and copyright). They monopolize and destroy.

They gave Larry Nassar 60 years in jail for "possessing photos". A death sentence.
If the family dog tries to hump your leg you don't sue the parents for a million dollars. You wouldn't put a dog in jail for 60 years. Even if it were true. But it's not true because there is no truth left.
Search the term "vape", do you see TheUbie.Com?



Tim (Web doc Sept 2018)
info@TheUbie.com

Facts about false confessions (from above):

See:

How False confessions work

And

Studies of False Confession and beleifs

And:
Also, Its a lot easier to falsly admit being a victim.


* In fact Cosby has now been released because the court admitted lots of unrelated past deeds testimony which were essentially not relavant to actuall innocence or guilt. In short. It was later determined there was too much resonable doubt. As it was cosby had been convicted because he truthfully admitted to once trying a qualude (in the 70s). An innocuous trivia. But enough to confuse starry-eyed dreamers.
So (if you ever smoked a joint.) Then "AH HAH!" You were working with foreign drug lords!! Unfortunatly that was the clear reasoning process of what we call justice. So they put an elderly Blind Man in jail.
It is unclear weather statistics will ever be the determing factor. But ststistics can light the way to open-mindedness.