How the Tim Tebow 'John 3:16' Data Defeats Chance... Scientifically

2 of 6 - How science recognizes the noted 316s as Non-Random which has nothing to do with our various beliefs and non-beliefs in synchronicity.

This first essay in this presentation begins here.

Click here to check out our Landing Page where all of the essays are listed.

We now begin our discussion of the Denver-Pittsburgh NFL game that was played on January 8, 2012. Seen at the end of the previous post, I’ve included the final play of the Denver-Pittsburgh “316” game above for easy reference.

An Objectively Significant Play

The belief that synchronicity relies on subjective forms of meaning has long since become a cornerstone of skeptical theory. Skeptics tend to lean heavily on the belief that “true believers” select data arbitrarily and construct personally meaningful patterns through cognitive errors like selective attention and confirmation bias. This critique is particularly easy to make when the focus is on individual or micro-level experiences of pattern recognition—and that’s exactly where the focus has been for decades.

In the case of this synchronistic pattern, our judge and jury is a group. In any game story, most of a football game’s roughly 160 plays are, to football fans, relatively routine or trivial. The play above clearly is not. It is objectively significant—not cherry-picked to make a point. Game-winning, eighty-yard touchdown plays can't be downplayed, though that is a common skeptical tactic. Adds further weight is the that this play also set a new record for the fastest overtime score in NFL playoff history. This lends it technical significance, also in a objective sense.

Earlier, we noted what Carl Jung wrote after recounting his famous beetle story. He said it was the latest in a series of improbable outcomes that, in his mind, made the episode seem synchronistic. The touchdown play above was much the same—except this time, it unfolded in front of a group. Tens of millions of people were witnessing a pattern that was equally compelling. But unlike Jung’s private experience, this couldn’t be dismissed because of its public and objective nature.

This play fit and therefore logically extended the bizarre narrative that had developed around Tim Tebow’s stint as Denver’s starting quarterback during the fall of 2011. Those facts are on the record, and that changes the synchronicity debate in a significant way. There was no credible way for skeptics to deny the existence of the pattern. Nor is there any credible way to dismiss it, because those facts remain on the public record. And yet, this pattern wasn’t even the reason the play became one of the most memorable in NFL history.

The Five-Part Macro Sync Pattern

So, we have this sensational and strangely familiar play. People were still talking about the incredible ending when, just a few minutes after it happened, someone in the media noted that Tebow had finished the game with exactly 316 passing yards. We note that this, total passing yards, is a significant detail to football fans.

Tebow’s 316 passing yards quickly drew major attention. It did so through a seemingly involuntary form of association that is commonly reported in experiences of synchronicity. Here, I’m referring to the Florida–Oklahoma college championship game, where Tebow wore “John 3:16” on his eye black—for the only time in his college career—en route to winning the 2009 national title. These two high-stakes events shared a what we call a common element: 316.

The connection deepens: the Florida–Oklahoma game and the 2012 Denver–Pittsburgh game were played exactly three years apart, aligning through what we can call a meaningful duration. From the standpoint of objective significance, the point is simple—we, and by extension football fans, tend to view anniversary dates as inherently meaningful. That default significance gives the timing of these two events added weight.

The more compelling data point was Tebow’s feat of throwing for exactly 316 passing yards. It immediately recalled a latent memory in the local group’s collective conscious: of him wearing “John 3:16” during the 2009 college championship game—Event A—which had prompted 90 million people to look up the verse during and after that broadcast. Seen in the all-important context of the 2011 synchronicity narrative, Tebow’s exact 316-yard performance extended a second recurring theme. Tebow wasn’t just strangle able to pull off the clearly improbable, his good fortune had a way of compelling both believers and detractors to reflect on his deeply held Christian faith.

Minutes later, commentators noted that Tebow had thrown for exactly 316 yards on ten completions, averaging precisely 31.6 yards per completion—another 316. This is where a basic understanding of football helps clarify a claim that’s easily verifiable. Football fans intuitively recognized that throwing for 316 yards on just ten completions was extremely rare. Thirteen years later, it remains an unprecedented feat in NFL history.

Adding to the intrigue, three more significant 316s emerged within the next twenty-four hours. Pittsburgh threw an interception on a 3rd-and-16 play]. Observers also noted that Pittsburgh controlled the ball for exactly 31 minutes and 6 seconds during Event B, the Denver-Pittsburgh game. A broadcasters reported that the TV audience share was 31.6% at the moment Tim Tebow threw the now-famous game-winning pass.

This time, there’s no denying the existence of a legitimately and objectively meaningful pattern. The noted 316s were not arbitrarily selected—they were closely tied to significant, rather than trivial, data points. The significance of the 316s wasn’t esoteric, and had absolutely nothing to do with numerology (which is another kind conversation). Each of the five 316s pointed directly and specifically to a single reference: John 3:16, in a truly objective fashion. Once again, around 90 million people looked up John 3:16—a story widely reported by major media outlets, including TIME magazine.

Here’s another way of viewing these results:

What are the Odds?!

In synchronistic episodes, people often ask: What are the odds? In discussions of synchronicity, this is almost always posed as a rhetorical question—and for good reason. It’s usually impossible to calculate the improbability of a micro sync or a personal experience of synchronicity.

Suffice it to say, NFL fans didn’t seriously investigate the odds question either. By midweek, most had already moved on to other talking points. But this was a missed opportunity. Any serious attempt to examine the probabilities would have shown—or at least strongly suggested—that the emergence of this five-part 316 cluster was non-random in the scientific sense.

What everyone seems to have overlooked is that this five-part pattern challenges the null hypothesis, which assumes that patterns occur by chance. In statistical terms, science expects such a cluster to be replicable in at least 5% of trials—or, as it's more commonly put, at least 1 in 20 times. By that standard, others should be able to produce this five-316 cluster—or a comparable one—at least once in every 20 randomly selected NFL games, or at least 5% of the time. This is science speaking. And an official way of scientifically measuring this 316 pattern.

On Default Assumptions versus Virtual Statistical Miracles

It’s important to note that the null hypothesis is a default assumption—that patterns are due to chance. This represents science’s starting position before testable data is examined, and it's very different from the insistence some people have that such patterns must be due to chance. Unlike certain skeptics, science remains permanently open to having its default assumption proved incorrect.

We will discuss the improbabilities of these five data points in more detail later. For now, all the casual reader needs to know is that the combined improbability of our first five 316s is light years beyond science’s 1 in 20 threshold for non-randomness.

As we’ll demonstrate, the five 316 occurs with a rarity of about 1 in 50 NFL games. The second 316 is unprecedented; most sources estimate 18,000 NFL games, though one cites 16,000 (possibly excluding the AFL). We’ll use the lower figure to favor the chance hypothesis. The other three 316s occur less frequently than 1 in 10 league games—less than weekly in a season of about 15 games, as any football fan would agree. We’ll dive into the specifics later, but for now, let’s stick with the “much less” than a 1 in 10 rate. This simplification isn't just for the sake of convenience. This heuristic approach is all that’s needed, since our goal is to match, exceed, and completely obliterate the 1 in 20 threshold.

This is why it was necessary to remind the reader of how compounding probabilities are calculated, by multiplying individual odds. For the five 316s, we calculate 1/50 for the first 316, 1/16,000 for the second, and 1/10 for each of the other three, yielding a combined improbability of 1 in 800 million. Event B, therefore, presents a verifiable pattern that is expected to occur far less than once in 800 MILLION league games.

As anyone with an elementary school educatin must agree, 1 in 800 million is well beyond the null hypothesis’s 1 in 20 threshold (p ≤ 0.05). What happened on January 8, 2012, in Denver was nothing short of a statistical miracle when compared to the expectations of science’s null hypothesis and the widely held assumption of chance.

On Carl Sagan and Extraordinary “Claims”

If someone told a personal story with odds like these, we wouldn’t believe it for a second. This is one of the main reasons why synchronicity has yet to be taken seriously by mainstream skeptics—and for understandable reasons. The more improbable a story sounds, the more we demand evidence. That’s something micro syncs rarely provide. Here, the essential facts cannot be denied, because this is a macro sync—an objectively meaningful pattern based on data points that are publicly documented and verifiable.

What we’ve just done exactly what Carl Sagan rightly insists on.

We have delivered extraordinary evidence. In doing so, we haven’t just defeated the null hypothesis.

We’ve OBLITERATED it.

And we’re only just getting started.

More ‘John 3:16’ Evidence

The Birth of the Tim Tebow Legend

While researching this case study, I came across a fascinating story about Tim Tebow—one that many say marked the birth of his legend. Back in high school, this preacher’s son played an entire half with a broken leg and still managed to score a 29-yard touchdown.

Click the link below to learn more about the story. You’ll also find a video of Tebow’s run, which is well worth watching. This isn’t just a throwaway anecdote, either. To any football fan, it counts as a significant and meaningful data point. If you have any doubt about that, just ask around.

If you do check out the video, don’t be misled by the listed date—November 14, 2003—which happened to fall just three days before Tebow’s 16th birthday, offering up yet another seemingly remarkable 316. I later discovered, however, that the "Broken Leg Game" actually took place on October 31st of that year. This detail came to light through a lawsuit that partially involved events from the game in question:

Two ‘Meaningful Durations’

Here’s where the Tim Tebow narrative reaches further back in time—beyond the first of our two main events, the Florida–Oklahoma college game. It does so with perfectly logical consistency, being tightly tethered to our central data point: 316. This truly significant performance—the birth of the Tim Tebow legend—took place exactly 1,896 days before Event A.

These two objectively significant episodes form yet another meaningful duration, as 1,896 is a clean multiple of 316. Put another way, we’re looking at a temporal alignment that one could expect to see just once every 316 times, whenever two significant football events are randomly selected.

This is, in fact, a doubly meaningful duration, as the birth of the Tebow “legend” occurred exactly 316 × 6 days before the moment he famously wore “John 3:16” on his eye black during the 2009 college championship game. The “6” also provides a striking conclusion to Tim Tebow’s 80-yard touchdown pass at the end of Event B, which sealed the win with a 6-point score. Once again, we’re dealing with hard data in which the number 6 plays an objectively clear role—expressed in terms that carry no esoteric considerations.

The takeaway here is simple—especially when we keep the focus on 316. We’re looking at a pairing that would appear much less than once in every 10 random pairings.

Now, let’s add this clearly relevant detail to our initial timeline and continue using the same exceedingly low rate for the sake of convenience. With six 316s to consider, we’re now dealing with a real-world pattern that should appear much, much less than once in every 8 billion NFL games.

This, versus science’s standard of 1 in 20:

On to the next 316. As any football fan will tell you, it’s a big deal when a top player announces which university he’ll attend. All eyes were on Tim Tebow when his moment came—and rightfully so. More so than most high school stars, frankly. At the time of his college selection, Tebow was widely recognized as the top high school football player in the state of Florida.

Here’s the next point: Tebow chose to attend the University of Florida 316 weeks before Event B—that unforgettable Denver–Pittsburgh NFL game, which led another 90 million people to look up John 3:16, driven by those five clearly significant 316s.

At this point, it’s fair to say that Tim Tebow might just have a thing for 316. Don’t you think? This is starting to look like public validation of the personal experience of synchronicity. Many people have observed similar patterns in their own lives—recurring numbers, dates, or symbols that seem to appear with uncanny timing. They recognize what's going on but often can’t prove it. Here, we clearly can.

The difference? These seven 316s aren’t just private impressions. They’re on the public record.

So instead of rushing to dismiss personal perceptions, we now have a case where the pattern is visible, verifiable, and measurable—which makes it harder to ignore.

What are the odds?

You don’t need to be a football expert to sense that far fewer than 1 in 10 players will have picked their university 316 days—or 316 weeks—before a randomly selected NFL game.

Still, for the sake of consistency, let’s stick with our conservative “1 in 10” estimate and let the analytics folks handle the fine print.

Even at that unrealistically low level of rarity, our seventh significant 316 push makes this undeniable picture the kind of thing we could expect to see far less than once in 80 billion NFL games, when all such data points are thought to be entirely governed by chance—as the vast majority of academics, mainstream thinkers, and many football fans currently believe.

Triple 3-16 Formation

While discussing Tim Tebow’s time as Denver’s starting quarterback, we pointed out how the Broncos lost their last three games. We noted how that likely pleased his detractors, as it certainly pleased those who thought his success was due to luck and luck alone.

What they didn’t recognize, though, was that Tebow’s Broncos had lost those three games by an average of 16 points. Final scores are significant details as well, of course, which brings us to our next 316—but only if this outcome is improbable. And it is, as NFL fans will agree, both intuitively and because the hard data is also on the public record.

This gives us our eighth 316—what we’ll call Denver’s Triple 3-16 formation.

Reflect on this picture and how it shifts the common narrative—or how Tebow’s 80-yard touchdown is remembered. The Denver–Pittsburgh NFL game (Event B) caused people to look back in time to the Florida–Oklahoma game (Event A). That’s where everybody had left off. Then came the Broncos’ next game against New England, with injury updates and other developments. People moved on quickly, and the Denver–Pittsburgh game’s story was framed as one that recalled the past.

But now we see evidence of possible foreshadowing—three times—all based on 316. Event A—the John 3:16 college game—seems to have been foreshadowed by the birth of the Tebow "legend." The timing of Tebow’s college selection also appears to foreshadow the conclusion of Event B. And now, we see yet another meaningful 316—our eighth—tied to Tebow’s Broncos just prior to that same game, the Denver–Pittsburgh matchup, which got so many people talking because of its five notable and clearly relevant 316s.

As we observed earlier, Tebow first came up with the idea of wearing "John 3:16" on his face exactly 33 days before Event A, the Florida-Alabama SEC Championship. That’s certainly worth mentioning again at this point, especially since John 3:16 largely concerns Jesus dying at the age of 33. I could easily incorporate this detail into my probability analysis. Instead, I’ll simply note it. The reason is fundamental: my sole objective is to beat science at its own game. The best way to do that is by focusing on the 316s.

The DOUBLE Triple 3-16 Formation

Prior to Event B, the Pittsburgh Steelers’ last 3 games were also decided by an average of 16 points—our ninth and final significant 3:16.

Something very non-random and purposeful does seem to be going on here, wouldn’t you agree? For those following along, it will be hard to believe what comes in the next post—but that’s getting ahead of things. Let’s continue to be proper skeptics and stay grounded in the scientific method.

FINAL SCORE Science p > 0.05 vs < 1 in 8 TRILLION

For the reasons mentioned, we can be absolutely certain that this second Triple 3:16 would also occur far less than once in every 10 NFL games. With our ninth 3:16, we’re now looking at a pattern so rare that one could expect to see it much, much less than once in every 8 trillion NFL games.

Here’s another look, where the key pieces are put in linear form. I’ve added that time when Tebow said he thought of or was Called to write John 3:16 on his face paint:

We are clearly looking at a story that no sane person would ever believe—were it not for the fact that the data cannot be denied.

We’re well past the point where the distinction between absolute and virtual proofs matters in any meaningful sense. I could easily demonstrate that this data reaches the 1-in-20-quintillion level of rarity—or thereabouts—based solely on this macro sync’s 3:16s. All things considered, I’m confident the pattern could be pushed into the Planck level of improbability.

By all appearances, as various AI systems agree, we have indeed defeated science at its own game while seriously changing the terms of engagement around the discussion of synchronicity, by shifting the focus on public testable examples.

What if I told you that this data set amounts to less than half the story. Click here to learn the rest of the so-called Tim Tebow John 3:16 story.