Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 2 votes

Orwell, Huxley and Time travel point to 2016


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#16    prometheuslocke

prometheuslocke

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 238 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 21 April 2013 - 09:06 PM

View Postshrooma, on 21 April 2013 - 01:47 PM, said:

.
i'd say it's more akin to conformation bias havelock.

So, in anticipation of this argument, I have been working on a method of calculating the statistical probability of this type of pattern being chance.  The initial results, albeit based on only a single sample, are post here

http://www.unexplain...howtopic=246615

The result was less than 0.001%

Edited by prometheuslocke, 21 April 2013 - 09:24 PM.


#17    Quaentum

Quaentum

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,542 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The number of fringe believers is inversely proportional to what is left to discover in our world.

Posted 22 April 2013 - 06:50 PM

View Postprometheuslocke, on 16 April 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

What experience?  The "idea" of synchronicity is self-confirming in and of itself.  It shows a pattern with coincidences which are too great to be random.  In this case, I am extrapolating one more event, which coincides with another idea that was shown to me by an external influence.  

In this pattern there are 7 of 8 points in time confirmed and logically correlated, with only one remaining.

Extrapolating an event that has not yet happened is called predicting the event.  In all the examples I have seen on the net of people using synchronicity to extrapolate (predict) future events, not one of those where the predicted date has passed has come true.  That is the experience I refer to.  From this we can conclude one of two possibilities.  1 - That no one can accurately utilize synchronicity resulting in incorrect extrapolations (least likely possibility) or 2 - that the concept of synchronicity is not valid and therefore we have people cherry picking dates and numbers or just plain coincidence (most likely, in deed most probable possibility)

AA LOGIC
They didn't use thousands of workers - oops forgot about the work camps
There's no evidence for ramps - You found one?...Bummer
Well we know they didn't use ancient tools to cut and shape the stones - Chisel marks?  Craps
I still say aliens built them!

#18    shrooma

shrooma

    doesn't have one screw fully tightened.....

  • Member
  • 3,506 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 22 April 2013 - 08:08 PM

synchronicity calls into question free-will through predeterminism.
it would be interesting to know just who you suppose is doing the predetermining....?

- - - - -disclaimer- - - - -    
all posts- without exception- are humourous.
if you fail to grasp the sublety, then don't whine on like a mardy-arsed
bĦt˘h due to your lack of understanding.

#19    Quaentum

Quaentum

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,542 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The number of fringe believers is inversely proportional to what is left to discover in our world.

Posted 24 April 2013 - 03:29 PM

View Postprometheuslocke, on 14 April 2013 - 10:59 PM, said:

Posted Image

Orwell and Huxley's works both describe parallels to theBiblical Fall of Man, set in our modern times, where the government is responsible for the destruction of liberty, freedom, and individuality.  The authors met in a single location, at Eton College in 1917, where Huxley briefly taught Orwell.  From there, they separated, and neither cites the other as an inspiration for their works, and there are significant synchronicity surrounding the time frame in which each published their disutopic visions, and historical events that may prove that Huxley and Orwell were more than mere authors, but actual prophets whose works are the key to unlocking the time frame to the End Times, sealed in the books of Revelation and Daniel.

Synchronicity, the appearance of two or more events that are unlikely to occur by chance, may in fact be the signature of a hidden intelligent influence over the course of civilization.  These patterns appear throughout our history, but rarely in such a beautiful and undeniable form as the one which is revealed by analyzing the works of these two authors.  Another synchronistic pattern in history may imply that our understanding of the Universe itself was also inspired through this intelligent influence, and points squarely to quantum physics as the mechanism by which this inspiration occurs.



Recently, new discoveries in quantum mechanics have shown that it may be possible for quantum entanglement to transmit classical information through time.   The scientists description of this phenomenon revolves around equidistant amounts of time, and shockingly this exact mechanism can be used in order to decode a hidden meaning in the works of Aldous Huxley and George Orwell.  This hidden meaning takes on a significant religious undertone, and much like the pattern which supports the idea that our understanding of the Universe has been signed by the "Trinity," this pattern shows a clear parallel to the Biblical story of the Fall of Man, from Eden.
The example given by the researchers is "if the past detector was active at a quarter to 12:00, then the future detector must wait to become active at precisely a quarter past 12:00 in order to achieve entanglement." Thanks to this peculiarity, the researchers are calling their research "teleportation in time." Because spatial teleportation is almost a routine practice in labs today, it's only a matter of time before scientists start tinkering with sending particles into the future.Earlier I told you Huxley and Orwell met together at Eton College, a not so hidden allusion to the Garden of Eden.  I was lead to this fact by searching through our history for a time and place in which they were together, in looking for a point where their minds could have been "entangled."  My search was based on the supposition that there exists a technology which would allow for the minds of people to be controlled after being entangled, using quantum physics, to a transmitter at one point in time.  This connection would last forever, and thus would require the subject to be physically located near this machine only for a short time, and then afterwords communication would be possible anywhere, any time.  This was my search for a technological mechanism for divine inspiration.  I believe I have found it at Eton.

Orwell entered Eton College in 1916, and wrote 1984 exactly 32 years later, in 1948.  Using the description of timelike entanglement above, continuing to use this 32 year period after 1948 yields the year 1980.   Oddly enough, Orwell re-titled his novel 1984 four times, from "1980" to "1982" and then finally "1984."  Upon first discovering this, it was my belief that the book, which is truly a prophetic work, was pointing to the time frame where this technology was used by humanity in order to begin the End Times.  Continuing with the theme of Christian iconography being displayed through this synchronistic pattern, I found that Pope John Paul II met with the President of the United States in exactly those three years.

Looking at Aldous Huxley, his entry to Eton as a teacher was in 1917.  Using the same pattern as Orwell, this yields a 15 year period between his presence at Eton and the writing of his novel, in 1932.  Exactly 15 years later brings us to 1947, the year that a UFO supposedly crashed in Roswell, NM.  I have previously written that this crash is the fallen star discussed in Revelation 9:9. Continuing the pattern described by timelike entanglement, another 15 years after 1947 brings us to the year 1962.. the year Huxley wrote his final novel, Island.  This novel was his vision of Utopia, and I believe the inspiration Huxley received is a microcosmic key to finding the date of the next epoch of humanity, the start of the apocalypse.  

Going back to Orwell, the period between 1980 and 1984 would parallel Huxey's timeline in 1947, and is perhaps a hidden linking of the Roswell, NM crash to whatever it is that occurred between the Vatican and the United States at those meeting.  The 32 year period between the writing of 1984 and his entry to Eton, taking into account the 4 year period from 1980 to 1984, brings us to a similar 4 year period.

2012-2016

Posted Image
(click to zoom)The parallels between the Huxley and Orwell timelines are too much to ignore.  The concept displayed, of telling a macrocosmic story via a microcosm is a synchronistic pattern I have noticed from this entity time and time again.  It is its signature, we see it throughout the Bible, and we see here it in modern times.

"Why do you speak to the people in parables?" He replied, "Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.  This is why I speak to them in parables:"Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand. -Matthew 13:11-13Several month ago, on 12/12/12 I wrote that I had, through an "inspiration," which revealed to me a pattern in Daniel and Revelation which pointed to the year 2016 and specifically, a period between August and September as the Apocalypse.  This date range was used by calculating the three sets of days in Chapter 12 of Daniel and Chapter 12 of Revelation from the day it was unsealed, 12/12/12.

The end result of adding 1260, 1290, and 1335 to 12/12/12 are 5/25/2016, 6/24/2016, and 8/8/2016.

These dates form a pattern, the months ascend from five to nine, and the days of the first two are the product of the reverse of that series and the first. In the final date, 8/8/2016, the product yields the year instead, 2016. The final iteration of the series yields 9/1/2016, with the product giving the month.

Note also, that the three sets of days are given in two separate books, all chapter 12, pointing to the day of unsealing, 12/12/12.

But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

-Matthew 24:36

1260 5/25/2016 5 * 5 = 25 from Revelation 12:6
1290 6/24/2016 6 * 4 = 24 from Daniel 12:11
1317 7/21/2016 7 * 3 = 21 not mentioned
1335 8/08/2016 8 * 2 = 16 from Daniel 12:12
1359 9/01/2016 9 * 1 Solar eclipse

The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.
-Joel 2:31

SEPTEMBER 2016

The symmetry is beautiful.  Consider The Source.

In the Bible you have the downfall of man resulting in his being cast out from paradise.  In the works of Huxley and Orwell you have the degradation of society that while it does have an impact on man is IMO not the same thing and not a parallel to the biblical story.

On the page pointed to by the second link of your post, you indicate that Newton, Maxwell and Bohr, having all gone to Trinity and Faraday's lab being located at Trinity Buoy Warf was not a coincidence.  If you had actually researched the location of Faraday's lab you would have found it was not at the warf but west of there  http://www.londontow...nd_Museum/7677/  This effectively removes Faraday from the mix.

You will need to supply references or links to sites that support your belief that spatial teleportation is routinely practiced in labs today.

Orwell had chosen two titles for his book, "The Last Man In Europe" and "1984" (which was merely the last two digits of the year in which he wrote it reversed).  He wrote letters in October 1948 to his literary agent and his publisher asking for input on which title to use and of course we know which one was chosen.  http://jackofkent.bl...-his-novel.html  As we can see it was not some future knowledge or synchronicity that played a role in the final title.

Revelation 9:9 "They had breastplates like breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was like the sound of chariots, of many horses rushing to battle."  is part of a description of locusts and has nothing to do with a fallen star.  Perhaps you meant 9:1.  In any case fallen stars are generally meteors and meteorites.  With the number of meteors that can and do fall to Earth each year, trying to tie that into Roswell is one of the biggest stretches imaginable.

Concerning your counting of days to important dates (quoted again here) (I have numbered them 1 - 5 for easier reference)

Quote

1 - 1260 5/25/2016 5 * 5 = 25 from Revelation 12:6
2 - 1290 6/24/2016 6 * 4 = 24 from Daniel 12:11
3 - 1317 7/21/2016 7 * 3 = 21 not mentioned
4 - 1335 8/08/2016 8 * 2 = 16 from Daniel 12:12
5 - 1359 9/01/2016 9 * 1 Solar eclipse

You have made your calculations based on 12/12/12 being the start date.  Here are the verses from the Book of Daniel you have used.

Quote

12:11 From the time that the regular sacrifice is abolished and the [m]abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days.

12:12 How blessed is he who keeps waiting and attains to the 1,335 days!

For 12/12/12 to be the start date you must provide evidence that regular sacrifice was abolished and the abomination was set up on 12/12/12.  Regardless of how you arrived at your start date, unless the conditions in 12:11 have been met, you can not say that 12/12/12 is the actual start date.

In your multiplication table numbers 1 & 2 (5*5, 6*4) point to specific days as they should since days are being counted.  #4 (8*2) points to the year, but since days are being counted not years, it should point to the 16th day.  Since to make it work you have to point it to the year, it invalidates your multiplication table comparison for that date.  numbers 3 & 5 are not based on any numbers found in the bible but were added just to make the multiplication table work.  The verse in Joel describes a total solar eclipse.  The first one to happen after 8/8/2016 is on 8/21/2017 not 9/1/2016.  Since #3 doesn't exist, #4 does not point to the day and #5 isn't 9/1/2016, then your multiplication table is invalid.

The verse in Joel does not point to a specific date so it can be any time between now and when the sun goes nova and consumes the planet.

Whether you are doing this on purpose or not I can not say but you are using well known fringe methods to support your hypothesis.

1 - Use incorrect evidence (location of Faraday's Lab)
2 - Use non-existent evidence (1317 7/21/2016 7 * 3 = 21 not mentioned)
3 - Make unsupported assumptions (The verse in Joel pointing to 9/1/2016)
4 - Reference fictional material as evidence (The symmetry is beautiful.  Consider The Source.)
5 - if what you want to use as evidence doesn't fit properly with the hypothesis, mold it until it does.

AA LOGIC
They didn't use thousands of workers - oops forgot about the work camps
There's no evidence for ramps - You found one?...Bummer
Well we know they didn't use ancient tools to cut and shape the stones - Chisel marks?  Craps
I still say aliens built them!

#20    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Commander in the Secret Space Fleet

  • Member
  • 24,480 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 24 April 2013 - 07:28 PM

It's rather a pity that H.G. Wells never went to Elton, since he surely would be another one who made a significant contribution to the time travel/Futurist dystopia genre. But perhaps it wouldn't be so easy to fit him into all these fiendishly complicated Numerological musings.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#21    prometheuslocke

prometheuslocke

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 238 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:16 AM

View Postshrooma, on 22 April 2013 - 08:08 PM, said:

synchronicity calls into question free-will through predeterminism.
it would be interesting to know just who you suppose is doing the predetermining....?

a time traveling mind controlling sentient machine.  VALIS?


#22    prometheuslocke

prometheuslocke

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 238 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:19 AM

Quaentum

The sacrifice wording has concerned me too.  In Revelation it says " from the time of the unsealing" which is why I went back and grabbed the series of days from Daniel.  It is repeated, in Revelation though.

What would you consider a modern day daily sacrifice?  I've tried to think about it, but clearly it's not what we do anymore.  If you were from the future, and trying to explain a future event to someone from 500BC, what kinds of things do you think you might call a "daily sacrifice?"

Orwell, from wikipedia:
Orwell, being disillusioned by the onset of the Cold War intended to name the book 1948. The name was changed at the publisher's request. According to the introduction of the Penguin Modern Classics edition, Orwell originally meant 1980 as the story's time, but as the writing became prolonged, he re-titled it 1982, then 1984, coincidently the reverse of the year written, 1948. The full title of the first edition was Nineteen Eighty-Four. A novel.

Faraday:
As a respected scientist in a nation with strong maritime interests, Faraday spent extensive amounts of time on projects such as the construction and operation of light houses and protecting the bottoms of ships from corrosion. His workshop still stands at Trinity Buoy Wharf above the Chain and Buoy Store, next to London's only lighthouse and a school that is named after him.

Joel:

The verse is pointing to a series of celestial events, both a blood red moon and a solar eclipse (in the most literal reading).  There's a series of matching events in 2015, which also happen to miraculously coincide with a series of Catholic feasts.  http://wakeupbabylon.blogspot.com/2011/03/2016-converging-clues-and-timelines.html

The verse clearly states that the coming is after these events, and that's the only information provided.  I thought it was oddly coincidental that there was a solar eclipse on the final day of the series... almost synchronous.

Do you think the locust description sounds machine like?  I don't really agree that "falling star" and UFO crash is a big stretch... again,  in my view, to bring something forward to modern times as a "Biblical prophesy" the detail would have to be changed somewhat in order not only to describe it to the "prophet" but also to ensure that it remained in the book.   The locust description similarly, really makes little sense without the context of them actually being machine like, yet it would have been impossible to describe ... say.... a drone to someone from 300BC.

I do agree that valid synchronicities are few and far between, which is exactly what makes them so interesting when they occur in such a high occurrence, related to a single event, or group of related events.

Edited by prometheuslocke, 25 April 2013 - 04:42 AM.


#23    Irrelevant

Irrelevant

    Apparition

  • Closed
  • PipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Joined:24 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 25 April 2013 - 05:02 AM

Sometimes the things you seek are in plain sight and in looking for the hidden they are passed over.

Edited by Irrelevant, 25 April 2013 - 05:04 AM.


#24    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Commander in the Secret Space Fleet

  • Member
  • 24,480 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 25 April 2013 - 07:13 AM

View Postprometheuslocke, on 25 April 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

Quaentum

The sacrifice wording has concerned me too.  In Revelation it says " from the time of the unsealing" which is why I went back and grabbed the series of days from Daniel.  It is repeated, in Revelation though.

What would you consider a modern day daily sacrifice?  I've tried to think about it, but clearly it's not what we do anymore.  If you were from the future, and trying to explain a future event to someone from 500BC, what kinds of things do you think you might call a "daily sacrifice?"

Orwell, from wikipedia:
Orwell, being disillusioned by the onset of the Cold War intended to name the book 1948. The name was changed at the publisher's request. According to the introduction of the Penguin Modern Classics edition, Orwell originally meant 1980 as the story's time, but as the writing became prolonged, he re-titled it 1982, then 1984, coincidently the reverse of the year written, 1948. The full title of the first edition was Nineteen Eighty-Four. A novel.

Faraday:
As a respected scientist in a nation with strong maritime interests, Faraday spent extensive amounts of time on projects such as the construction and operation of light houses and protecting the bottoms of ships from corrosion. His workshop still stands at Trinity Buoy Wharf above the Chain and Buoy Store, next to London's only lighthouse and a school that is named after him.

Joel:

The verse is pointing to a series of celestial events, both a blood red moon and a solar eclipse (in the most literal reading).  There's a series of matching events in 2015, which also happen to miraculously coincide with a series of Catholic feasts.  http://wakeupbabylon.blogspot.com/2011/03/2016-converging-clues-and-timelines.html

The verse clearly states that the coming is after these events, and that's the only information provided.  I thought it was oddly coincidental that there was a solar eclipse on the final day of the series... almost synchronous.

Do you think the locust description sounds machine like?  I don't really agree that "falling star" and UFO crash is a big stretch... again,  in my view, to bring something forward to modern times as a "Biblical prophesy" the detail would have to be changed somewhat in order not only to describe it to the "prophet" but also to ensure that it remained in the book.   The locust description similarly, really makes little sense without the context of them actually being machine like, yet it would have been impossible to describe ... say.... a drone to someone from 300BC.

I do agree that valid synchronicities are few and far between, which is exactly what makes them so interesting when they occur in such a high occurrence, related to a single event, or group of related events.
What on earth do any of those things have to do with price of fish, let alone with each other? Faraday was interested in the construction of Lighthouses and corrosion protection? And that's got what exactly to do with the great numerological conspiracy?

Edited by Colonel Rhuairidh, 25 April 2013 - 07:14 AM.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#25    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,048 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 25 April 2013 - 03:35 PM

View Postprometheuslocke, on 25 April 2013 - 04:16 AM, said:

a time traveling mind controlling sentient machine.  VALIS?
Because that would be the logical thing.


#26    Lava_Lady

Lava_Lady

    Official UM Asylum Resident

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,832 posts
  • Joined:20 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Hawai'i

  • Wha? /:0\

Posted 26 April 2013 - 11:58 AM

I tried to read this about 3 times and my mind kept drifting...can someone paraphrase in bullet points?  I'm in ADHD mode.

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function."  - F. Scott Fitzgerald


#27    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Commander in the Secret Space Fleet

  • Member
  • 24,480 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 26 April 2013 - 02:03 PM

View PostLava_Lady, on 26 April 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

I tried to read this about 3 times and my mind kept drifting...can someone paraphrase in bullet points?  I'm in ADHD mode.
it needn't require that. I've been trying to seek clarification or some explanation as to what it's all about, but I can only assume that the people responsible for promoting it are ignoring me.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#28    prometheuslocke

prometheuslocke

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 238 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 27 April 2013 - 02:45 AM

View PostColonel Rhuairidh, on 26 April 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

it needn't require that. I've been trying to seek clarification or some explanation as to what it's all about, but I can only assume that the people responsible for promoting it are ignoring me.

I answered the only question you asked that made any sense.  The quote you are "questioning" is directly related to the person I was replying to, who incorrectly asserted that Faraday's workshop was not on Trinity Buoy Wharf. It's nothing more than providing proof of the location.


#29    prometheuslocke

prometheuslocke

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 238 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 27 April 2013 - 02:48 AM

Quote

1 - Use incorrect evidence (location of Faraday's Lab)
2 - Use non-existent evidence (1317 7/21/2016 7 * 3 = 21 not mentioned)
3 - Make unsupported assumptions (The verse in Joel pointing to 9/1/2016)
4 - Reference fictional material as evidence (The symmetry is beautiful.  Consider The Source.)
5 - if what you want to use as evidence doesn't fit properly with the hypothesis, mold it until it does.

1. The location is correct for his workshop
2.  the fact that the point is not mentioned is irrelevant, it's not used in the theory either.  the purpose of displaying it is to show that there is a linear pattern described by the days in daniel and revelation.
3.  It's not an assumption, and I wasn't suggesting that Joel pointed to that date, rather that the event on the date was correlated to the statement in joel, which is true and valid.
4.  Really?  Are you kidding?
5.  You display a prototypical pattern of attempting to lump everyones theories into a 5 point analysis.  In doing so, you meld the theory to fit your analysis method, make incorrect assumptions, and change the meaning behind the theory, just so you can use the same 5 points every time.  Your analysis is wrong on every single point.  Now what?  Am I proven right?

You are supposed to think critically, and analyze ideas and concepts.  When you spend your time attempting to fit each and every theory into an "analysis box" that you yourself created, all you are doing is wasting time.  The theory has merit, which you completely ignore by picking apart small details, not even attempting to glimpse the entire idea.  Meanwhile, just for your own knowledge, just because one detail may be wrong, does not mean an entire theory should be discarded.  Your attempts and holding steadfast to a world where "you know everything there is to know" by dismissing anything you do not believe or understand based on frivolous details will only keep you in the dark longer than most.

Edited by prometheuslocke, 27 April 2013 - 02:51 AM.


#30    Quaentum

Quaentum

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,542 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The number of fringe believers is inversely proportional to what is left to discover in our world.

Posted 07 May 2013 - 08:00 PM

View Postprometheuslocke, on 27 April 2013 - 02:48 AM, said:

1. The location is correct for his workshop
2.  the fact that the point is not mentioned is irrelevant, it's not used in the theory either.  the purpose of displaying it is to show that there is a linear pattern described by the days in daniel and revelation.
3.  It's not an assumption, and I wasn't suggesting that Joel pointed to that date, rather that the event on the date was correlated to the statement in joel, which is true and valid.
4.  Really?  Are you kidding?
5.  You display a prototypical pattern of attempting to lump everyones theories into a 5 point analysis.  In doing so, you meld the theory to fit your analysis method, make incorrect assumptions, and change the meaning behind the theory, just so you can use the same 5 points every time.  Your analysis is wrong on every single point.  Now what?  Am I proven right?

2, 3 - You can not use non-existent data to show a progression.  The missing point, if found could be well above or below the line showing a different pattern.  Since it is a counting of days and not months or years, using days for some points and years for others does not show a pattern.  Further to say that the event on the date is correlated to the statement in Joel, and by way of that inferring that the date is correlated to the statement in Joel is false since Joel does not give a date and it can be any date from when that statement was written until the sun goes nova and may well be outside the supposed linear progression.

You have, as I have alluded to in #5, molded the data to fit the progression and have thereby invalidated the progression.  In fact, when you eliminate the non-existent data and the non-existent correlation and graph the remaining dates it does not show the correlation you have presented.

4 - No, since the source you linked to is "The Matrix", a work of fiction, it is not evidence nor does it support your theory in any way.

The 5 point analysis was because there were 5 points to address.  it could just as easily have been 7, 10 or 15.  Sometimes presenting them as points makes it easier to read and understand.

prometheuslocke said:

You are supposed to think critically, and analyze ideas and concepts.  When you spend your time attempting to fit each and every theory into an "analysis box" that you yourself created, all you are doing is wasting time.  The theory has merit, which you completely ignore by picking apart small details, not even attempting to glimpse the entire idea.  Meanwhile, just for your own knowledge, just because one detail may be wrong, does not mean an entire theory should be discarded.  Your attempts and holding steadfast to a world where "you know everything there is to know" by dismissing anything you do not believe or understand based on frivolous details will only keep you in the dark longer than most.

You have left out the most important thing to analyze and that is the evidence that is presented to support a hypothesis.  If the evidence does not stand up to scrutiny then it does not provide any support.  In fact I have concentrated on what you have supplied as evidence.  Your reference to my analysis of the evidence as "dismissing anything you do not believe or understand based on frivolous details"  because I do not show the evidence to be valid is quite interesting.

I also find it funny that you say I am supposed to analyze a hypothesis and then complain that I perform an analysis within a box of my own making.  Analyzing a hypothesis without analyzing it is like baking bread without putting it in the oven.

Whether a hypothesis has merit is dependent on the evidence presented withstanding scrutiny not on the declaration of the person presenting the hypothesis.

My analysis though in error on some things is right on spot on others.  What it shows is your hypothesis is lacking sufficient supportive evidence.

AA LOGIC
They didn't use thousands of workers - oops forgot about the work camps
There's no evidence for ramps - You found one?...Bummer
Well we know they didn't use ancient tools to cut and shape the stones - Chisel marks?  Craps
I still say aliens built them!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users