No, it's more like I simply don't want to waste my time looking up a citation because some stranger thinks he needs it. And apparently it's not a standard world-wide if they keep giving me A's on papers in which every single reference is completely fabricated.
That does not prove anything. It simply means whom ever marked your paper neglected to verify the citations.also
Quote
Skeptics such as Robert T. Carroll, Claus Larsen, and others have questioned the methodology of the Global Consciousness Project, particularly how the data are selected and interpreted,[3][4] saying the data anomalies reported by the project are the result of "pattern matching" and selection bias which ultimately fail to support a belief in psi or global consciousness.[5] Other critics, whilst disagreeing with GCP findings, have noted that the open operation of GCP "is a testimony to the integrity and curiosity of those involved."[6]
I can already see why the experiment is flawed. The events that are chosen to be "significant" are chosen by the experimenters, who, like all humans, have confirmation bias. 
Something tells me that you just can't find evidence to back your statement up, and you don't want to look like a fool.
