Hyper Dimensional Design

[Dutch]

Dutch, you've been going on about with HDD for what, five, ten years now? Doesn't the fact that you've convinced no-one in that long time tell you anything? Why do you believe posting the same kind of word salad over and over again might someday get you a different response from people?

What do you know about other people? Its not really necessarry to convince, some people may have changed to way they look at reality because of this material I'm sharing. That already makes a difference. You are dealing with it, even if you are not consciously aware of it.
You don't know what it does to your subconscious mind, you don't know the effects on the 'expressions' that need to materialize.

I'm not doing this in order to get recognition.

 

[Dutch]

Looks like that happened before.
Page:
http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/68056-Dutch-is-visiting-the-Amazing-Randi-and-the-JREF-folks. Post #23.
Post:
http://www.bautforum.com/showthread...ndi-and-the-JREF-folks.?p=1569103#post1569103

Where you posted the following under the name "Oost":
09-September-2009 10:38 AM #23 Oost View Profile View Forum Posts
Banned Join Date Sep 2009
Posts 3
Dutch is not allowed to post at BAUT forum but he would really like to talk about what has been said here in this thread. He would like to invite posters in this thread to come over at HDDesign forum in this specific thread :

Bad Astronomy and Universe Today forum
http://hddesign.forumup.nl/about239-hddesign.html

you can login with 'reader' password 'reader'

So, you appear to be a recidivist.

Sure I am at BAUT. They changed the forum rules because of this HDDesign 'research' and banned me after 30 days to PROVE Hddesign.

ridiculous and unacceptable

I registered under a different name only to invite others to proceed with the discussions at hand at that time.

 

[Dutch]

I remember that! I got a PM about that, as did a lot of other people. I remember thinking, "Are you kidding me?". To my knowledge, nobody went. Why bother, right?

That's interesting.....You didn't bother to give a civil answer to my request but you did talk about it with others?

A lot of other people? If I recall correctly, I have send a pm to you, Torsten, van Rijn and maybe Orphia. I can't check.

Why bother? you are still here, right?

 

[Dutch]

You're quite right.

Why run after Dutch when he has nothing to offer.

So you do think I have something to offer

 

[dafydd]

So you do think I have something to offer

Uh? Read the post again and do your best to understand it this time.

 

[dafydd]

What do you know about other people? Its not really necessarry to convince, some people may have changed to way they look at reality because of this material I'm sharing. That already makes a difference. You are dealing with it, even if you are not consciously aware of it.
You don't know what it does to your subconscious mind, you don't know the effects on the 'expressions' that need to materialize.

I'm not doing this in order to get recognition.

You are not sharing it because you are about the only person in the world who believes this nonsense.

 

[Daylightstar]

Blue, I have explained it here in this thread. I have described it with the ( scheduled ) comet encounters with spacecraft Deep Impact/Epoxi and the Earth-Moon-Epoxi transit. I have described it with the moon impacts, I have described it with the orbit of asteroid Steins here earlier this year. Its in the 'communication' posts here ( January 2010 ). And now with Phobos.

What exactly do you not understand about how Pi has been applied here?

Blue Mountain asked what "Pi based design" IS. Not how you 'apply Pi'.
It's not in those 'communication' posts I'm afraid.

 

[Daylightstar]

We are Earthlings aren't we? If Phobos is showing this Intelligent design in its orbit than its designed this way for us to discover. Its a mean of 'communication'. If we would have lived on Venus, than Phobos would have had a different orbit in order to draw our attention.

So, if I understand correctly, you feel that the orbit of Phobos is intelligently designed to communicate something to humans living on earth, specifically.

Now, to be able for this 'communication' to reach the minds of humans, 'it' will need to be (as you say) discovered, by one or more individuals.
You have stated in the past that the whole thing comes to you via "thoughts out of nowhere" or "intuitive thoughts".

Would you consider that you were 'chosen' to discover 'it'?

 

[The Man]

Would you consider that you were 'chosen' to discover 'it'?

Well I suppose he should be glad that at least he wasn't chosen to be on Venus to discover 'it'!!!

Say Dutch, have you ever actually tried to see if there are some of your ‘communications’ for Venus? Perhaps they just dialed the wrong orbital number or you weren’t home at the time so they left a message with your neighbor. What if all the messages you think you're getting are for someone else who might one day be on Venus and you're just their answering machine? All as equally likely as any interpretation you have given.

 

[Blue Mountain]

Blue, I have explained it here in this thread. I have described it with the ( scheduled ) comet encounters with spacecraft Deep Impact/Epoxi and the Earth-Moon-Epoxi transit. I have described it with the moon impacts, I have described it with the orbit of asteroid Steins here earlier this year. Its in the 'communication' posts here ( January 2010 ). And now with Phobos.

Daylightstar had a good comment on this response: I asked what is Pi-based design. Since I also said it was an automatic fail to refer to other materials, I'll have to rate this response as a FAIL, in that you did not answer the question.

What exactly do you not understand about how Pi has been applied here?

• Why do you see it as a "communication" when you take two essentially random numbers, apply a random arithmetic operation to them (in this case, division), and the result is close to a well known mathematical constant?
• What use is the knowledge? What light does it shine upon the workings of the universe?
• How can this be applied anywhere else?

 

[Blue Mountain]

Because it just came to mind as an intuitive thought to do so. It happened while at work on the day corresponding with Pi-point Steins.

I was busy at work so I had to check it at home later that day and the Pi correlation instantly showed up.

This kind of intuitive 'developments' happen all the time in this HDDesign research.

Here's my problem with your whole intuitive approach: it's not replicable.

In order for something to be useful, one generally has to be be able to do the same thing again, following the same (or similar) rules, and achieve a similar result. That's what a cookbook is: a set of ingredients and procedures that, when followed, generally produce similar results.

But HDD isn't like that. The whole of HDD is simply a jumble, a mish-mash, a haphazard application of orbital periods, mathematical constants, arithmetic operations, and news reports that are put together "intuitively" with no rhyme or reason that can be discerned to a casual observer.

In the initial phases of discovery, it often is useful to just throw a couple of things together and see what happens. But the next step, which I don't think you've ever done, is to ask "why"? Why did this particular operation produce the result it did? Is there a way I can test it? For example, if I apply the same rules to a similar set of inputs, will I get a similar result?

What I see you doing instead is simply madly hopping from one thing to another, and gratuitously accepting results that seem to fit and ignoring results that do not. A good researcher doesn't do that. A good researcher, upon noticing results that don't fit, takes the time and effort to determine why the expected results did not occur. Very often it's because the original hypothesis is incorrect in some way, or is simply wrong.

 

[Blue Mountain]

We are Earthlings aren't we? If Phobos is showing this Intelligent design in its orbit then it's designed this way for us to discover. It's a means of 'communication'. If we would have lived on Venus, than Phobos would have had a different orbit in order to draw our attention.

Er, no. All other things being equal, If we lived on Venus the orbit of Phobos would be precisely the same as it is now. And your supposed communication simply vanishes.

 

[Blue Mountain]

Its not what came to mind yet, but maybe its an interesting thing to do.
If it would appear that an object in space shows indications of artificial or intelligent design, be it a moon or asteroid ( like Steins ) or whatever, I would certainly give it a look yes. Doesn't have to be based on this same Pi based design

But only Steins and Phobos with their orbital periods

I've combined these two responses because my response is the same for both of them

First you say, "[whatever 'intuitive' thing I'm looking for] doesn't have to be based on this same Pi based design." Then you note that two minor objects, out of thousands in the solar system, exhibit what you believe is one of your zoo of "designs."

The term we use for this is data mining. Given a sufficiently large set of inputs—in your case, the orbital periods of thousands of objects in the solar system, hundreds of spacecraft and missions launched from earth, a jumble of mathematical constants and operations, and hundreds of thousands of events being reported in the news annually—it's really, really easy to throw a lot of them together and find something. What is much more difficult is explaining why that something isn't simply random noise but is, in fact, useful.

The contention of everyone else on this thread and on BAUT is simply showing correlations is useless. Unless there is a systematic, documented, and replicable process in place, one that can be followed by other people to obtain the same results you do, you're simply wasting your time.

 

[Dutch]

So, if I understand correctly, you feel that the orbit of Phobos is intelligently designed to communicate something to humans living on earth, specifically.

Now, to be able for this 'communication' to reach the minds of humans, 'it' will need to be (as you say) discovered, by one or more individuals.
You have stated in the past that the whole thing comes to you via "thoughts out of nowhere" or "intuitive thoughts".

Would you consider that you were 'chosen' to discover 'it'?

There are many roads that lead to Rome

I wouldn't say chosen, I'm just capable to tune in somehow. I don't see any reasons why others shouldn't be able to do so. Follow your intuition, take synchronicities serious and in my case this HDDesign 'research' is the best way to comprehend.

There are lots of other people too, although I do think that these identified elements of Hyper Dimensional Design as outline here in my 'research' are indeed unveiling the most profound underlying truth of our reality.

When I was asked here why I didn't apply Pi on Deimos I decided to give it a closer look on the net.

It appears that already back in 1975 this very same Pi correlation was published by the British researchers M. W. Saunders and Duncan Lunan in their book "Destiny Mars".

They wrote:

Saunders and Lunan also found the following pi correlations (among others), all with a margin of error of 0.5 percent or less, for the two Martian satellites Phobos and Deimos: the mean height of Deimos' orbit equals pi times Earth's equatorial radius, and if a satellite in Earth's orbit were at the same height as that of Deimos, it would revolve twice for every rotation of Earth; for every rotation of Earth, Phobos orbits Mars pi times, and if Earth had a satellite at the same height as Phobos, it would revolve two pi times in the time it takes Earth to rotate once.

http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1890.htm

In this HDDesign 'research' we have seen this showing up again, with this difference that Phobos is only seconds away and closing in on orbitting Mars Pi times. Saunders and Lunan also unveil this Pi-correlation with Deimos!!

 

[Dutch]

Daylightstar had a good comment on this response: I asked what is Pi-based design. Since I also said it was an automatic fail to refer to other materials, I'll have to rate this response as a FAIL, in that you did not answer the question.

If you don't understand what this Pi based is, than you don';t understand how it is explained with the Deep Impact - Moon transit in relation to the scheduled comet encounters, Orbit Stein in relation to Earth and orbit Phobos in relation to Earth, among more examples in this thread.

I don't think you have even read those explanations, did you?

How can I help you if you refuse to do your own research?

 

[Dutch]

Why do you see it as a "communication" when you take two essentially random numbers, apply a random arithmetic operation to them (in this case, division), and the result is close to a well known mathematical constant?

Because its the very same design as first discovered with the Deep Impact- Moon transit in relation to the ( scheduled ) comet encounters, in the orbit of asteroid Steins and DISCOVERED on this determined pi point of orbit Steins by intuition: I though to apply it on Phobos that day and the confirmation instantly showed up.

What use is the knowledge? What light does it shine upon the workings of the universe?

Universe or universes? Why not ask what it means to your own existence?
You are consciously aware of your existing in our reality.
If that's enough for you it stops here.

If you understand the implications of the subjects at hand here, than you also understand that it means that we are part of a greater ( multi-dimensional ) reality, that our destiny is in our own hands but that we should be very careful not to cross specific red lines and that your own existence isn't limited to your rigid 'self' that is expressing here in our 3D ( or 4 time ) reality

How can this be applied anywhere else?

First of ll, I think everything in our 3D dimensions is somehow intelligently connected by this underlying intelligent Design. These Pi and Phi correlations show up at macrolevel because we are able to detect and comprehend it and they are part of the 'communication' that is taking place in order to help us during the times we live in and for our spiritual development.

 

[Dutch]

Here's my problem with your whole intuitive approach: it's not replicable.

In order for something to be useful, one generally has to be be able to do the same thing again, following the same (or similar) rules, and achieve a similar result. That's what a cookbook is: a set of ingredients and procedures that, when followed, generally produce similar results.

But HDD isn't like that. The whole of HDD is simply a jumble, a mish-mash, a haphazard application of orbital periods, mathematical constants, arithmetic operations, and news reports that are put together "intuitively" with no rhyme or reason that can be discerned to a casual observer.

In the initial phases of discovery, it often is useful to just throw a couple of things together and see what happens. But the next step, which I don't think you've ever done, is to ask "why"? Why did this particular operation produce the result it did? Is there a way I can test it? For example, if I apply the same rules to a similar set of inputs, will I get a similar result?

What I see you doing instead is simply madly hopping from one thing to another, and gratuitously accepting results that seem to fit and ignoring results that do not. A good researcher doesn't do that. A good researcher, upon noticing results that don't fit, takes the time and effort to determine why the expected results did not occur. Very often it's because the original hypothesis is incorrect in some way, or is simply wrong.

Why should it be replicable? Its like comparing a 3-dimensional experiment within a specific set of rules based on our current understanding of our 3D reality with an apparent inter-dimensional correlation that isn’t limited to this set of rules. You can’t force intuition to express the same way within a set of rules. There’s not even 1 rule you can apply when it comes to consciousness and intuition.

The casual observer should experience these correlations himself because that’s the best way to comprehend. The observer could also choose to monitor the material for an extended period of time in order to start to see these correlations and to comprehend that they aren’t just coincidences.
The observer can also dismiss it but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true

I always ask myself the question ‘why?’, but there’s no reason to get similar results when I apply the same rules on the moon Europe for instance. We don’t live in such a simple reality. The intuitive thought was to apply it on phobos and that was indeed confirmed.

So according your limited perspective of a good researcher I should dismiss this correlation with for instance phobos because it doesn’t show up with other moons?
That’s only valid if you want to prove Pi in every orbit of moons and that’s not what I’m saying.

 

[Dutch]

Er, no. All other things being equal, If we lived on Venus the orbit of Phobos would be precisely the same as it is now. And your supposed communication simply vanishes.

No its still valid, I would recognoze it as an intelligent Earth - pohobos correlation. The math is still the same

 

[Dutch]

I've combined these two responses because my response is the same for both of them

First you say, "[whatever 'intuitive' thing I'm looking for] doesn't have to be based on this same Pi based design." Then you note that two minor objects, out of thousands in the solar system, exhibit what you believe is one of your zoo of "designs."

The term we use for this is data mining. Given a sufficiently large set of inputs—in your case, the orbital periods of thousands of objects in the solar system, hundreds of spacecraft and missions launched from earth, a jumble of mathematical constants and operations, and hundreds of thousands of events being reported in the news annually—it's really, really easy to throw a lot of them together and find something. What is much more difficult is explaining why that something isn't simply random noise but is, in fact, useful.

I'm not 'looking' for intuitive thoughts or synchronicities, they just happen.

Isn't it beautiful to have this thought about Phobos and see it confirmed instantly?

The contention of everyone else on this thread and on BAUT is simply showing correlations is useless. Unless there is a systematic, documented, and replicable process in place, one that can be followed by other people to obtain the same results you do, you're simply wasting your time.

Blue.... you really have to expand the way you think. You want it to be easy but that's not how it works. Your rigid 3D perspective is useless.

I'm not wasting my time, you are ignoring the opportunities that are given to you. There's no future for science without including consciousness and other dimensions.

 

[Mister Earl]

What do you know about other people? Its not really necessarry to convince, some people may have changed to way they look at reality because of this material I'm sharing.

You'd have to share material first. When we ask specifics, you refuse. Instead you hope we go away after you barrage us with insane amounts of word salad.

That already makes a difference. You are dealing with it, even if you are not consciously aware of it.

I don't 'deal' with imaginary things.

You don't know what it does to your subconscious mind, you don't know the effects on the 'expressions' that need to materialize.

Considering you absolutely refuse to give details on your prediction process, I'm pretty comfortable in saying you don't have a process. You make up vague predictions on the spot and then built a framework of stupid rules around them that protects you from 'misses'. There is nothing to HDD, Dutch. It'll never do another human any good at all, beyond waste time.

I'm not doing this in order to get recognition.

I have my doubts. HDD doesn't do anything for you but waste time and give you attention from people who stop by to politely ask what you're on about.