I don't think you guys read the article correctly. The box is not designed to predict the future, it's just designed to randomly generate a 1 or 0 and then record that operation. According to probability theory, if it is truely random then it will generate near equal amounts of 1s or 0s. What happened was that before 9-11 and the Asian Tsunami disasters occured the ratio between 1s and 0s became ridiculously disproportionate, almost like the box was malfunctioning. What makes this differ from a malfuction is that there were 65 of these boxes being monitored, all of which were operating independently, and they all underwent the same erratic behavior. The boxes aren't predicting anything, or rather they aren't predicting in a manner that we can interpret. This doesn't tell us that the future is predictable, all it says is that major world events can effects before they happen. It is also possible that these events were flukes, but simple rational thought reveals that that possibility is so unlikely that it's nearly inconcievable. It's ok to be skeptical, but do so after properly reading the article so that you can make valid statements. I must admit, I'm skeptical too, but that's because the article presents no imperical evidence to support its claims. That we have to take its rhetoric as fact with no justification except faith in journalistic integrity is what makes this article dubious.