Coincidence or fact?

Why are coincidences more readily acceptable than what the facts suggests? How can facts be simply dispelled due to coincidences?

Take for example these 'facts'...

• Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
• John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.

• Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
• John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.

• The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.

• Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

• Both wives lost children while living in the White House.

• Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.

• Both Presidents were shot in the head.

• Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy.
• Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln.

• Both were assassinated by Southerners.

• Both were succeeded by Southerners.

• Both successors were named Johnson.

• Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
• Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.

• John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839.
• Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939.

• Both assassins were known by their three names.

• Both names are comprised of fifteen letters.

• Lincoln was shot at the theater named “Kennedy”.
• Kennedy was shot in a car called “Lincoln”.

• Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a warehouse.
• Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theater.

• Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

• A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland.
• A week before Kennedy was shot, he was in Marilyn Monroe.

Coincidence or something more?

Very interesting.

Maybee the fact can be that they are murdered by the same source?

If these coincedence are on purpose it must be a very brilliant but mentally ill source.

www.snopes.com...

Not that Snopes is always a great source, but they do a wonderful job of breaking down each of these "facts" and making sense out of them.

There is an excellent article on Snopes.com about this. The second-to-last and last paragraph may serve as a more-or-less direct answer to your question.

The ability to see patterns everywhere may be due to the large number of events that are available to public experience/memory, and the persistent human drive to make sense of (what appears to be) a senseless world. As such, there will always seem to be an overarching sense of order, even if it's just a case of selective memory. I mean, we call this a crazy world! We insist it doesn't make sense, and it's gone to hell in a hand-basket... but, every time we look in the past, we will quickly find and point out such patterns.

On another note, imagine what happens when a pattern holds religious significance.

I have no real way of knowing that our dates hold any significance -- although I find it extremely unlikely, since our measurements are only relevant to this planet. Perhaps the relevance is only to those who find this information meaningful.

"there is no coincidence, only illusion of coincidence" (V)

Originally posted by Freelancer


Take for example these 'facts'...

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.

Numerical similarity based on man-made (decimal) rules and patterns.
Still, there may have been a relevant connection. All I am saying is, I don't see it.

Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.

Same as above.

The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.

So do many other names.

Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

Memorable presidents - who are also the ones that get killed more often than others - usually are. (Not to mention that the "civil rights" are perceived and labeled as such by posterity.)

Both wives lost children while living in the White House.

In Lincoln's times losing ANYONE (usually to disease) wasn't all that unusual.
In Kennedy's case it did, of course, deviate somewhat from the "rule"
(as he and his wife did in several other aspects, too).

Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.

There is a 1:6 chance of that happening.
(Sundays should probably be excluded, for it's usually a day off for official visits).

Both Presidents were shot in the head.

That's where you usually aim when your target is sitting down.

Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy.
Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln.

Interesting.
I am not sure it's highly significant, but it is interesting.
(By the way, I wonder how many secretaries did each one have at any given time?)

Both were assassinated by Southerners.

Considering their involvement with "civil rights" (see above), that's not really surprising.

Both were succeeded by Southerners.

And why not...?

Both successors were named Johnson.

Interesting.
It's not a terribly uncommon name, but it's interesting.

Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.

John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939.

We've been through this one above... ; )

Both assassins were known by their three names.

In Lincoln's times it was more usual than it is today to actually say and spell out the middle name, if there was one.
As for Oswald - we only know how the media called him.
(And that, of course, goes for Booth, too.)

Both names are comprised of fifteen letters.

Pass...

Lincoln was shot at the theater named “Kennedy”.
Kennedy was shot in a car called “Lincoln”.

Interesting!

Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a warehouse.
Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theater.

Interesting.
(Not at all inexplicable, but interesting.
Plus I am getting tired by now... ; ))

Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

That's a common fate of presidential assassins.
(G. Princip, the man who shot Archduke Franz Ferdinand, would have been torn apart by the crowd if it hadn't been for the gendarmerie who took him away.)

A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland.
A week before Kennedy was shot, he was in Marilyn Monroe.

See, I was really REALLY hoping you would omit this one...
(I have seen this "fact sheet" many times before.)

It's just a joke - and a crude, not a very ingenious one, at that.


Bottom-line: for all I know, there MAY have been some extra-ordinary connection between the two assassinations. The "facts" above prove nothing (and I am not even counting the last "fact"), but there MAY have been.

Or, let me reverse the last sentence: there MAY have been a connection, i.e. something else than a string of coincidences, but the "facts" listed prove nothing.

Cheer up, though: there are many, many, MANY sets of history data and events, all around the world, that really do make you wonder...





[edit on 20-12-2007 by Vanitas]

You all make a good argument towards coincidence or fact, as I would have done up to a few months ago when I began to look into the realm of conspiracies and those facts presented to me.

However,

Is it not true, that in absence of concrete facts, i.e those we can personally vouch for, that we 'accept' those facts that we feel more comfortable with?

Might this admission alter our future judgments on any theory's or conspiracies we might find on the ATS forums?

Those facts I originally posted are 'facts', yet just like many who see them would normally dismiss them as 'coincidence' and forget their relevance.

Just exactly how many coincidences do we dismiss before we take notice of them, i.e take them as facts and look into them seriously?

reply to post by Freelancer


wow what dose this mean. its for sure a sign!!!

Because the ego has a hard time to bend the rules to the truth within.

Its a very good question.

Just exactly how many coincidences do we dismiss before we take notice of them, i.e take them as facts and look into them seriously?

Hey, I hear you...
I just hope that you - or I, or anyone - will find a more convincing set of data.

It CAN be done.

Vanitas, YES I agree with your replys, the facts are "interesting" and "Numerical similarity based on man-made (decimal) rules and patterns".

The point is, where do we draw the line between similarities/coincidences and take them more seriously?. When does coincidence become fact?

[edit on 20/12/2007 by Freelancer]

Freelancer,

I would stick to your GUNS ON THIS ONE.

If you can pull patterns from certain things then good, these triggers are there for a reason.

[edit on 20-12-2007 by menguard]

Remember in a very real way all have something to benefit mankind, once its unlocked there goes the world and here comes potential.

I think you missed a few:

Both men were male.
Both men had hair on their heads.
Both men walked on two feet.
Both men breathed a mixture of nitrogen and oxygen.

Coincidence? Hmmm...

Because taking a series of events that occur after one another to have some innate meaning only because of spacial similarities is a logical fallacy - many different logical fallacies, depending on how you claim that the events are connected. The main one that comes to mind is post hoc ergo propter hoc, but it could be many fallacies depending on the context.