The Genesis Seal

[Twiler]

The opening words of Genesis either do contain underlying cryptic content, or they do not. There is no middle way. The text in question has existed for many centuries, so using it is not like throwing dice.Stokes234, I suggest it is untennable to keep suggesting that the Genesis Seal has fewer combinations of [emergent] words than in a control sample. Iy not only has many such words, but they are always conceptually related and in close proximity, with added visual appeal.
In a recent post, I described an analysis (admittedly superficial) that I have carried out in the same way on the entire Torah text. I found patterns that have similar characteristics, but so much dispersed that they are what you would expect to find in any such grid of Hebrew text. If you like, you may consider this to be the ultimate control text.
Incidentally, it was by searching for the three-letter word for 'light' in that 553x553 Torah Square that I arrived at the likelihood of finding that emergent word in the 8x8 G1 Square. The odds are about 5 to 1 against finding a single case, and 25 to 1 against finding two examples.

But why is this important? What makes finding patterns by re-arranging letters different from finding patterns in sequences of dice rolls?

 

[Kingfisher2926]

Read this case : http://www.badscience.net/2010/04/lu...-to-stupidity/

And tell us if you understand why we can be sure she was innocent, despite 7 people dying on her watch.

I shall be eternally grateful to you for pointing me in the direction of that Guardian article. And I now understand much better what other posters meant by the Texas sharp-shooter phenomenon.
I was particularly taken by the following paragraph in that article:
This is plainly foolish. All across the world, nurses are working on wards, where patients die, and it is inevitable that on one ward, in one hospital, in one town, in one country, somewhere in the world, you will find one nurse who seems to be on a lot when patients die. It’s very unlikely that one particular prespecified person will win the lottery, but it’s inevitable that someone will win: we don’t suspect the winner of rigging the balls.The thing is, I have expended some energy in other circumstances using the very same argument, without knowing it was already known as the Texas sharp-shooter phenomenon. This seems to be the key point: it is inevitable that on one ward, in one hospital, in one town, in one country, somewhere in the world, you will find one nurse…The important question seems to me to be, how does this principle apply in the case of the Genesis Seal? I am sure the answer must be that out of a very large number of samples of Hebrew text of 64 letters, one is sure to come across one case that reveals an inordinately large amount of emergent content. If that is the issue then I am in complete and utter agreement.

However, I must argue that that principle does not apply to the Genesis Seal. Suppose we looked at a large number of similar samples; I have used letters 1 to 64 (65 in the case of the G2 Square), but we could equally try letters 2 to 65, or 3 to 66, even up to the range 304742 to 304805 (that is the end of the Torah). Or we could look at any 8x8 zone within the 553x553 Torah Square, an example that I have examined (though not exhaustively, of course) with results I have described in recent posts. After doing so, I am reasonably certain that the first 64 letters of Genesis are entirely exceptional. I am not cherry-picking (which is equivalent to the Texas sharp-shooter thing).
One other point I wish to make here, though I have said it in other ways, is that the Genesis Seal is most noteworthy not just for the quantity of its cryptic content, but especially for its quality.

 

[Donn]

The important question seems to me to be, how does this principle apply in the case of the Genesis Seal?

In that text (Torah) there are chance formations of words. Think of these formations as the bullets in the side of the Texan barn. You can even think of your own brain as the machine gun. You are 'shooting' the meaning onto the side of the barn (the text.)

Your seal is like a bulls-eye that you place over the locus of whatever catches your eye — that being a concentration of bullet holes.

I don't think it matters that you only see the bullet holes when you employ your seal, that's just the same as pre-formatting the text. Think of the text as the barn. In your case you are building the barn to your liking (8x8 matrix yadda yadda) and then you start looking at the bullet holes.

That's my best shot.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

In that text (Torah) there are chance formations of words. Think of these formations as the bullets in the side of the Texan barn. You can even think of your own brain as the machine gun. You are 'shooting' the meaning onto the side of the barn (the text.)

Your seal is like a bulls-eye that you place over the locus of whatever catches your eye — that being a concentration of bullet holes.

I don't think it matters that you only see the bullet holes when you employ your seal, that's just the same as pre-formatting the text. Think of the text as the barn. In your case you are building the barn to your liking (8x8 matrix yadda yadda) and then you start looking at the bullet holes.

That's my best shot.

Don't get me wrong Donn, but I think you have completely glossed over the sense of my previous post. I have recently presented information that addresses every facet of the Texan sharp-shooter phenomenon. If you think of the 553x553 Torah Square as the side of the barn, the 8x8 zone that is the Genesis Seal sits at the exact centre anyway. So, it can be ubderstood as the bullseye without any tweeking on my part. The plain fact is that this 8x8 centre happens to exhibit a greater density of emergent content than any other part of the much vaster square.

Of course, you are not obliged to believe what I have said. However, I am happy to provide the raw data to anyone in this forum knows someone whose knowledge of Hebrew they would trust.

 

[Donn]

KF,
I'm not much in the brain dept. and I'm used to being wrong but I think my previous post was accurate; as far as clunky metaphors go. As you say, let's see what others think.

 

[jond]

Kingfisher: have you seen the ET Corn Gods site? You really should--it's fascinating. And every bit as valid as your Genesis Seal.

 

[MRC_Hans]

I grant that I am still alone in accepting the objective reality of the Genesis Seal.

No! We ALL accept the objective reality of it. The words and patterns are, of course, there. However, part of that objective reality, and one part that you seem to refuse to consider, is that it is not only random, but it is entirely within the predictable range of random sequences.

I am building a random matrix generator, with which I should be able to prove this to you, but I'm a little short for time. However, I'm flying to Taiwan Sunday; maybe I can do it on the flight.

But I do have the advantage of still knowing al lot more about it that I have already posted here.

If it builds on a faulty premise, it will not matter how much you know; it will still be wrong.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

If you think of the 553x553 Torah Square as the side of the barn, the 8x8 zone that is the Genesis Seal sits at the exact centre anyway.

Nonsense. It is the beginning of the text. Donn's point is that your correlation with the rest of the Torah follows the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy.

So, it can be ubderstood as the bullseye without any tweeking on my part. The plain fact is that this 8x8 centre happens to exhibit a greater density of emergent content than any other part of the much vaster square.

Can you prove that? Hint: You can't; I claim that a vast number of 64 letter sequences from all over the Torah will yield similar coincidences.

Hans

 

[David Swidler]

I spend my week immersed in Biblical Hebrew, Talmudic exegesis and sources of Kabbalistic interpretation. The premise of this thread so distorts the way the text is approached in these sources as to be laughable.

You don't go looking for patterns, even if you accept the divine origin on the Torah. In traditional Jewish learning g'matriya and other tricks of the text are mnemonics at best; and interpolating other letters into random strings of text is just plain stupid.

So now that a Rabbi has assessed your "thesis," Kingfisher2926 (if that's in fact what it can be called), and found it to be utter rubbish even from a believer's point of view, where does that leave you?

 

[stokes234]

Stokes234, I suggest it is untennable to keep suggesting that the Genesis Seal has fewer combinations of [emergent] words than in a control sample. Iy not only has many such words, but they are always conceptually related and in close proximity, with added visual appeal.

OK, then show that this is the case. Select your control group, describe how you made certain that the control texts were random rather than deliberately chosen, and show the tool you use to calculate the number of words in a given text. Your work can then theoretically be peer reviewed, though i'm not sure you'll be able to find anyone willing to devote the time.

After all that, perhaps you could tell us what information you have actually deduced from this genesis seal of yours?

 

[Dancing David]

So, it can be ubderstood as the bullseye without any tweeking on my part. The plain fact is that this 8x8 centre happens to exhibit a greater density of emergent content than any other part of the much vaster square.

And you did the frequency statistics on that?

What number of samples, what was the mean and the standard deviation?

 

[yy2bggggs]

I have recently presented information that addresses every facet of the Texan sharp-shooter phenomenon.

No you haven't. The fact that you think you did suggests that you don't understand the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

If you think of the 553x553 Torah Square as the side of the barn, the 8x8 zone that is the Genesis Seal sits at the exact centre anyway. So, it can be ubderstood as the bullseye without any tweeking on my part. The plain fact is that this 8x8 centre happens to exhibit a greater density of emergent content than any other part of the much vaster square.

First, how are you measuring density? "Number of patterns found" isn't a useful measure unless you have a methodical way of looking for patterns, because simply spending a longer time looking for patterns in one area will grant you this metric.

Second, what the heck is with this metric anyway? If you want to establish that the 8x8 seal in the beginning of the bible is special, you need to compare to 8x8 seals made with other texts (and the best bet is other non-biblical texts). Comparing the center of an 8x8 spiral to locations on a 553x553 spiral isn't a great metric anyway. And this assumes we build the spiral outwards...

But if we take what you're doing in the thread, it makes even less sense. Your G1 spiral starts at the outer edge of the seal, and goes inward. Once you hit the center, that's it. There's nothing more to do. So if you're going to claim that this piece of the building has more juicy information than the entire wall, then how exactly do you build this wall? It makes no sense. Either there is no 553x553 G1 Torah, because you need to start outside of an 8x8 spiral and go inward (and thus there's no more room to spiral), or you're supposed to start at the outer edge of a 553x553 seal when you do Genesis, which is not what you're doing.

Finally, none of this has anything to do with whether or not you're committing the Texas sharpshooter fallacy. What you're doing is searching for "special patterns", where the definition of special pattern is open ended. This is the shooting at the barn.

Once you find patterns, and find out what's special about them, you then calculate the probability that you'd find those patterns with those special properties by chance. This is the drawing your target around your holes.

Of course, you are not obliged to believe what I have said. However, I am happy to provide the raw data to anyone in this forum knows someone whose knowledge of Hebrew they would trust.

Nevermind the raw data. Showing us the data is actually irrelevant with respect to whether or not you're committing this fallacy. If you wish to show that you're not committing the Texas sharpshooter fallacy, provide the detailed methodology. We don't need the data--we can tell if you're committing the fallacy from the methodology alone.

If you'd like to provide the data, and someone wants to use it, that's a good thing, of course.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

No! We ALL accept the objective reality of it. The words and patterns are, of course, there. However, part of that objective reality, and one part that you seem to refuse to consider, is that it is not only random, but it is entirely within the predictable range of random sequences.

I am building a random matrix generator, with which I should be able to prove this to you, but I'm a little short for time. However, I'm flying to Taiwan Sunday; maybe I can do it on the flight.

I genuinely look forward to seeing the results. I will, of course, expect to see not just the same quantity of emergent content, but also the same level of apparent skill in its artistic presentation.

In the meantime, I shall continue to add to the 'target' that you will need to match. But have a good trip, if it is at all intended for pleasure.

 

[Sideroxylon]

I genuinely look forward to seeing the results. I will, of course, expect to see not just the same quantity of emergent content, but also the same level of apparent skill in its artistic presentation.

In the meantime, I shall continue to add to the 'target' that you will need to match. But have a good trip, if it is at all intended for pleasure.

What kinds of things would fit this qualification?

 

[Kingfisher2926]

I spend my week immersed in Biblical Hebrew, Talmudic exegesis and sources of Kabbalistic interpretation. The premise of this thread so distorts the way the text is approached in these sources as to be laughable.

You don't go looking for patterns, even if you accept the divine origin on the Torah. In traditional Jewish learning g'matriya and other tricks of the text are mnemonics at best; and interpolating other letters into random strings of text is just plain stupid.

So now that a Rabbi has assessed your "thesis," Kingfisher2926 (if that's in fact what it can be called), and found it to be utter rubbish even from a believer's point of view, where does that leave you?

With respect, I suggest your prior experience and training have predisposed you to that kind of skepticism. For example, the assertion that 'g'matriya and other tricks of the text are mnemonics at best' still does not rule out the possibility that Kabbalah has been influence by an apparently extraordinary introduction to the Torah, which I now call the Genesis Seal. Did you read my post (#289) about the kabbalistic understanding of the Creator being both Vast Face and Small Face, simultaneously?
A major part of my thrust has been that the Genesis Seal could have been seen by unsophisticated people of the past as an extraordinary bequest of divine providence. I still believe its underlying content is a deliberate construct. But even if it were not, it would still be important that history has been influenced by it.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

OK, then show that this is the case. Select your control group, describe how you made certain that the control texts were random rather than deliberately chosen, and show the tool you use to calculate the number of words in a given text. Your work can then theoretically be peer reviewed, though i'm not sure you'll be able to find anyone willing to devote the time.

After all that, perhaps you could tell us what information you have actually deduced from this genesis seal of yours?

As you say, ...i'm not sure you'll be able to find anyone willing to devote the time.. It would, indeed, take a great deal of time to do this formally. I was perhaps over-optimistic to hope that, by airing this material in the JREF forum, I might attract others willing to help. In all honesty, as an individual I do not have that kind of time at my disposal. So, I must proceed in the manner of a gifted amateur, not so much a professional mining engineer as a 'Skookum' Jim Mason.

What have I deduced? Concerning the origin of the Genesis Seal, this is all I can offer, at present:

As for the motive of the Genesis Seal author, that question is open to debate. Since I am presently the only person arguing for the Genesis Seal to be accepted as an objective reality, I am reluctant to come down on any particular option. However, I can offer the following provisional options in order of what I imagine will be increasing acceptability:
1. This part of Genesis at least is a divine revelation. The cryptic content of the Genesis Seal is a message from the same Creator to whom the creation account refers. The motive could be the same as for any supposed divine revelation.
2. The Seal is a very clever contrivance perpetrated by a savant mind at an unknown date, but not later that the Babylonian Exile. The motive could be either an attempt to support the existence of God by deception, an attempt to create a Jewish heritage that might guarantee their future survival, or just unmitigated mischief.

However, bit by bit, I shall present some important conclusions concerning the influence the Seal has had in human history.

 

[dafydd]

However, bit by bit, I shall present some important conclusions concerning the influence the Seal has had in human history.

No you won't. Pass.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

And you did the frequency statistics on that?

What number of samples, what was the mean and the standard deviation?

I have been looking at the Bible Code thing, to see what all the fuss was about. It seems the team at Hebrew University that first put forward that idea had to create completely new statistical tools to make their points. To the best of my understanding, ordinary statistical techniques do not apply to the Genesis Seal either. Also, while I have not concluded that the Seal is a divine revelation, I still feel uneasy about trampling over it too much with rule and compass. For the foreseeable future, I shall approach it as I would a canvas painted by a Grand Master.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

yy2bggggs,
Much of what you say in Post #432 implies that I have gone all over the barn wall in search of denser than usual patterns. That would be cherry-picking, which is patently not what I have done.
I agree it would be nice to be able to make comparisons with one or more control groups, but I explained in my previous post why that is not a practical possibility for me.
You have pointed out the the G1 and G2 Squares do not take us very far into the Torah text. Before very long, I shall present 8x8 G3 and G4 Squares in which the same text expands from the centre. In principle, there is no reason why that should not continue to the 553x553 square that can hold the entire Torah. We may surmise that the expanding squares illustrates a bounce that occurs precisely because the previous converging forms hit a brick wall.
For the moment I shall have to proceed in the role of a gifted amateur.

 

[Donn]

However, bit by bit, I shall present some important conclusions concerning the influence the Seal has had in human history.

Why bit by bit?

If you have not finished processing your 'data' yet, how can you know that there are important conclusions yet?
(That makes you look like you have decided a priori.)



Also, perhaps you already told this, but what made you suspect this particular code in the first place? Something must have suggested that 8x8 spiral thingy you are using.