Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy

[VRykV]

That's pretty cool. Thanks, Cramulus.
And: lots of people know that when they find out coincidences-that-look-like-something-meaningful, they're making up an order from coincidences-that-are-coincidences. They know that in theory.
But when actually involved in a "conspiracy theory" or something like that, notice that most of them forget about the theory and go on thinking and talking about the lenght of the Missisipi River that is 1/666 of the number of tiles on the floor of that room in the White House vel similia. Because, obviously, they want to find the Devil/the Conspiracy/God/the Sasquatch (or the God of Sasquatches, that would be original). Emotionally, they are sure of what they'll find. Logic follows the lead easily.
As King Mob said in Grant Morrison's masterpiece, "The Invisibles": "They are all coincidences. Like the coincidence of the light that comes when you push the button."
(The quote is not like that, I translated it from my Italian comic book, and with an horrible language, so forgive me and try to understand its meaning anyway, thank you)

[minuspace]

balls for cognitive psychology:
1) anticipating (red) things -> greater probability of noticing them
 i) more likely to see them coming
ii) more likely to remember them
   *) these two are connected that we know
iii) more likely to interpret indeterminate data as (red)

what is the difference between i,ii, and iii (working on it boss)

to satisfy analytical tendency my understanding starts from realizing that (i) and (ii) are contained in (iii)

what makes (i) and (ii) particular?

hypothetically, that they "actually" occurred at different times, relative to my point of view.

is this a dismissal of retro-causation?

(cutting diamonds...)

modal differences...

(i) will happen - somehow, not specifically
(ii) already happened - somehow, more specific

(ii) also has greater certainty : refers to "actual" [thing] more than "hypothetical" event

things are "contained" in the past because it is a dead-end through which we already passed twice
The future is the passage of giving

(brain melt)

(i) and (iii) are hard to discriminate
(ii) has a quality that does not entirely fit in the box of indeterminacy, again, because we looked and killed the cat already?