Mickey Mouse Methods
Unlike the sound statistical techniques
used in the work reported here,
there are many authors who (probably unintentionally) use
Mickey Mouse
methods.
Using these methods one can find almost any so-called
'message' of interest, in any sufficiently large text.
Gaining clarity about this helps us to avoid some critical pitfalls
and to appreciate the truly interesting cases in the Torah.
Mickey Mouse methods include:
-
Using words with common letters
-
Using words with few letters
-
Using large skip distances
-
Making many attempts
-
Finding first, explaining later.
Not all of these elements are necessary at once in order to create
Mickey Mouse codes; in fact the last two
can be used to produce very impressive-appearing tables in non-Torah
texts.
This is exactly what the code critics do, for example in the Hebrew
translation of the novel War and Peace. They then try to characterize
all legitimate work in the Torah the same way.
To obscure the issues further, many beginners
and not-so-beginners do use these Mickey Mouse methods in the Torah.
The internet and bookstores contain many such examples.
The picture looks impressive, and it is simply used as is,
without calculating the statistics properly. The authors hope thereby
to prove the identity of
the Messiah, predict World War III, or back their political beliefs.
Adding chaos to confusion, it is easy to miscalculate something that
is ordinary (say 1 chance in 3) as a 1 in a million occurrence!
(details in the final FAQ.) The math seems right, and supports the
author's thesis, so he uses it, fooling himself and many others.
We all agree that it does not make much sense to read
into the Mickey Mouse ELS's that this famous rodent
was or will be president. It is important to apply that same reasoning
to much of what we see published today on the codes.
The codes have no real "say" on any one
specific topic. Perhaps in a number of decades we'll be able
to derive clear messages, but today we simply don't know how.
Despite this limitation, we can show the reality of the overall
phenomenon. If this sounds like a contradiction,
here
is a quick analogy.
Back One Level
Back to Home Page