Which specific HalfPastHuman predictions from 2010–2025 can be independently verified against contemporaneous news records?
Executive summary
HalfPastHuman (Clif High) produced recurring “ALTA” or Web Bot prediction reports between 2010 and 2025, a fact documented in online archives and social posts [1] [2]. Independent, contemporaneous news records that confirm specific event-level predictions from those reports are not present in the supplied reporting, leaving verifiable matches between HalfPastHuman forecasts and real-world events essentially unproven by the sources provided [1] [2].
1. What can be verified: the existence and distribution of ALTA/Web Bot reports
HalfPastHuman’s monthly “Asymmetric Linguistic Trends Analysis Intelligence” (ALTA) reports—also called Web Bot outputs—are repeatedly attested in user posts and archive pages describing the project and offering links to Clif High’s output, confirming the program’s existence and public distribution during the period in question [1] [2]. These references establish that predictions were produced and circulated, but they are secondary or promotional pages rather than neutral contemporaneous news coverage of specific forecasted events [1] [2].
2. What the supplied reporting does not provide: contemporaneous news that validates particular forecasts
The materials available include retrospectives on predictions generally (e.g., pieces checking past predictions for 2025) but do not supply contemporaneous news articles that cite an ALTA/Web Bot forecast and then document that the forecast came true for a specific event between 2010–2025 [3] [4]. In short, the supplied sources lack side-by-side, time-stamped pairings of a HalfPastHuman prediction and news reporting that confirms the predicted outcome, so independent verification against contemporaneous records cannot be demonstrated from these documents [3] [4].
3. Alternative evidence lines and why they fall short in the supplied corpus
Some user-generated platforms and blogs celebrate HalfPastHuman’s accuracy and circulate selected past claims, but these are not independent, contemporaneous news outlets performing verification; they are amplification channels or archival pages tied to the predictor’s community [1] [5]. Broader journalism on 2025 predictions exists in the supplied set—analyses of century-old or corporate forecasts and whether they were correct—but those pieces focus on other forecasters and general prediction evaluation, not on corroborating ALTA/Web Bot event-level hits [3] [4] [6].
4. Implicit agendas and how they shape the record
Promotional posts and community reposts (Steemit, Web Bot forums, archive pages) naturally emphasize successful-sounding claims and drive traffic or subscriptions; those incentives create a survivorship bias in the public record that the supplied sources reflect, rather than systematic, contemporaneous fact-checking by independent newsrooms [1] [2] [5]. Major media retrospectives on “predictions for 2025” in the supplied set focus on historical or widely publicized forecast authors, not HalfPastHuman, which suggests either limited mainstream uptake of Web Bot predictions or simply that independent outlets did not treat them as verifiable beats worthy of contemporaneous follow-up [3] [6].
5. Bottom line: specific verifiable predictions are not demonstrable from the supplied reporting
Based on the documents provided, the only verifiable facts are that HalfPastHuman produced ALTA/Web Bot reports and that communities circulated them [1] [2]. The supplied corpus does not contain contemporaneous news articles that confirm specific HalfPastHuman predictions from 2010–2025 as accurate; therefore, no particular forecast from that period can be independently verified using only these sources [1] [3]. To reach event-level verification would require locating time-stamped ALTA predictions plus independent news reports from the same time that explicitly corroborate those forecasts—materials not present among the supplied sources.