Hyper Dimensional Design

[Daylightstar]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6688875&postcount=3973


No proper response has been given by you, Dutch.
...

Except, you came close with the link to the detailing of the 'identification' of the Hariri assassination.
You gave a link to a thread, but maybe it shows up very early in the thread.
We'll see later.

 

[Paul]

Except, you came close with the link to the detailing of the 'identification' of the Hariri assassination.
You gave a link to a thread, but maybe it shows up very early in the thread.
We'll see later.

Before Dutch tells everyone to look it up because he explained everything on his forums, I have looked.

The first mention of Hariri found via search is from Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:57 am and says-

So April 21 has a connection with February 14 and April 2

or

The Hariri killing and the death of JP II

 

[Dutch]

After all these years you guys start to look at Hariri for the first time?

have fun I would say.

Hariri was assassinated at HD Cube date at macrolevel orientation.
We have discussed it even here in this thread repeatedly.

You guys act as if its new to you, but I'm still willing to help you understand the Hariri situation when I notice that you are really trying to do so.

You may have noticed that I don't post as much as in the past anymore.
However, the info that I'm logging in the material is becomming much more profound as time proceeds.

The differences between those why ignore it and those who try to understand it will increase, buts that's inevitable.

I for one, will focus on the issues at hand, so I'm sure I will elaborate again on the Hariri situation during 2011. No dount about that because it still stands of what I have been saying about this Hariri situation over the last couple of years. It will come to a climax and it will appear on the timelines.

now back to 2009 HC82

While I'm here...


Nothing to say about the completely inaccurate data you used to 'prove' your guesses about 2009 HC82?

I cannot emphasize enough that this current timeframe is strongly connected to the Deep Impact / Epoxi spacemission itself.

The Pi based Design as described here in the HDDesign material was first unveiled by this very same spacemission Deep Impact / Epoxi on its way from Deep Impact on comet Tempel 1 ('first tempel') to its scheduled encounter with comet Hartley 2, expressing Pi during the 'artificial' Earth- Moon - Epoxi Transit.

This specific Pi based Design has unveiled some profound intelligent correlations since its discovery, as has been shown here in the HDDesign material. These correlations show up out of the blue after an initial intuitive thought or synchronicity.

The Deep Impact / Epoxi spacemission flew past Earth on December 31, 2007 for a gravity assist, creating a Hyper Dimensional Tetrahedron with the impact on comet Tempel 1 on July 4, 2005. This flyby was followed by a second flyby during the same timeframe in 2008 and even followed by a third flyby during this same timeframe last year

I won't post the image here because I'm not sure if its allowed, I'll post the link instead:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v117/Dutch23031965/deepimpact-earth-flybys-1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v117/Dutch23031965/deepimpact-earth-flybys-1.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v117/Dutch23031965/deepimpact-earth-flybys-1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v117/Dutch23031965/deepimpact-earth-flybys-1.jpg

This year during the same timeframe the intuitive thought comes through to give a closer look to the orbit of comet 2009 HC82. As seen from the next expected perihelion date of this comet, the 2 Pi points of the current orbit were determined ( based on this very same Pi Design).
As an unmistaken confirmation 2 dates showed up: may 4, 2011 which was already determined ( see explanation in previous post ) and the same date of the discovery itself: December 30, 2010!!!!

That means that the revelations in this HDDesign material are as much part of the 'communication' that is taking place as the identified intelligent correlations themselves. The fact that an intuitive thought comes through, that unveils an intelligent correlation that has been applied repeatedly and gives confirmation to that very same moment of the intuitive thought, that fact should really make you think.

Not that it matters for some of you or even most of you, you will dismiss the given correlations anyway. You will ignore, dismiss it or even ridicule it.

but that doesn't make it less true

every time again something shows up that confirms the given intelligent correlations that show up instantly out of the blue.

How smart must you be in order to understand it can't be just a coincidence?

time after time again?

wake up

When I talk about 2009 HC82, I talk about 'awakening in optima forma'
and this will become more clear during the given future timeframes.

 

[Daylightstar]

After all these years you guys start to look at Hariri for the first time?

...
We have discussed it even here in this thread repeatedly.
...

If this is the first time, then how was it discussed?
Then it must have been your particular brand of discussing, a monologue by you without listening to others.

...
You may have noticed that I don't post as much as in the past anymore.
...

No, we've noticed that you haven't posted the same long tracts of text available elsewhere. But this is a consequence of moderation for you breaking the rules.
But you already knew that.
It is however noticeable that you are now trying your hand at posting longer and longer texts again.

...

This specific Pi based Design
...

Which consists of doing Pi times Pi with all sorts of randomly selected numbers, for reasons of:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6644979&postcount=3785

yes why not? I don't know. ...

...

I won't post the image here because I'm not sure if its allowed,
...

Aw, here's a tissue.

Anyways, I haven't looked yet. But going by your latest post it sounds to me that in the past you have concocted a reason for why the killing of a middle eastern personality will have to lead to WWIII.
This hasn't materialized, but you just can't let go.
Will look at it later.

you are still avoiding presenting the calculations...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6672143&postcount=3950
and:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6677698&postcount=3966

...I asked for on your insistence
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6670150&postcount=3935

not at all. ask specifically and I will calculate it .

come on, ask it.

^{bolding and font enlargement by Daylightstar}

 

[Paul]

After all these years you guys start to look at Hariri for the first time?

If I were in a less charitable mood, I would mention your deliberate disregard for the truth in that statement.

have fun I would say.

Really? Because you usually say Srebrenica was all your fault or some other nonsense.

Hariri was assassinated at HD Cube date at macrolevel orientation.

You made up some dates and then found events to fit. That does not mean that the two events you cherry picked are in any way related to each other, or to events that happened on the other dates on you timeline.

We have discussed it even here in this thread repeatedly.

Good, you admit you were being dishonest before.

You guys act as if its new to you, but I'm still willing to help you understand the Hariri situation when I notice that you are really trying to do so.

I pointed out the first reference to Hariri I could find on your own site. That reference say nothing about Hariri except that the assassination happened to fall on a predetermined day which you wanted to be significant.

I for one, will focus on the issues at hand, so I'm sure I will elaborate again on the Hariri situation during 2011

Ah, I see. It's really important, but you just can't be bothered to make even the slightest effort to explain what the hell you're talking about.

It will come to a climax and it will appear on the timelines.

But that's definitely not a prediction, that's just you stating or estimating, on the basis of knowledge or reasoning, that (an action, event, etc.) will happen in the future or will be a consequence of something.

now back to 2009 HC82

This should be interesting...

I cannot emphasize enough that this current timeframe is strongly connected...
...As an unmistaken confirmation 2 dates showed up: may 4, 2011 which was already determined ( see explanation in previous post ) and the same date of the discovery itself: December 30, 2010!!!!

Incredibly you wrote all that nonsense without once addressing the fact that your data for 2009 HC82 is wrong.

That means that it is incorrect and cannot be used to calculate anything about 2009 HC82.

Which of wrong, incorrect or cannot are you taking issue with?

Not that it matters for some of you or even most of you, you will dismiss the given correlations anyway. You will ignore, dismiss it or even ridicule it.

Someone who blatantly ignores facts to further a personal agenda should be more circumspect.

but that doesn't make it less true

Being wrong makes it less true.

How smart must you be in order to understand it can't be just a coincidence?

How smart would you have to be to understand what a coincidence is?

When I talk about 2009 HC82, I talk about 'awakening in optima forma'

That's nice for you, do you have any idea what it means?

and this will become more clear during the given future timeframes.

I doubt that very much.

 

[The Man]

As of July 23 2010 NASA JPL has the orbital period at 1468.146174009244 days. You can even watch the orbit in their java animated diagram at that link.

Well let’s try it…

'Inwards' and 'outwards' has been explained in my previous update but wasn't allowed to be posted here.
I short: orbit 2009 HC82 is 3.39a = 3.39 * 365,25 = 1238,2 Earth days

Pi point 'inwards' based on the Pi Design as unveiled in the HDDesign material: 1238,2 / Pi/Pi = 125,4
1238,2 -125,4 = 1112.8
1112.8 / 2 = 556 days rounded

556 is heart of the 1111 days awakeningstimeframe as explained in the previous update.
'Outwards' gives 1238,2 * Pi *Pi = 12221 days rounded
which is 11 times 1111 awakeningstimeframe.

Dutch’s “Pi point 'inwards' based on the Pi Design” amounts to the equation…


X((1-p^-2)2^-1)

Or

X(2^-1-2^-1p^-2)

Or just X times about .4493


His “'Outwards'” point is just the equation Xp²
Or just X times about 9.8796

Where X is the orbital period of the body in question in Earth days.


With the latest orbital period of 14168.1 days we get “Pi point 'inwards'” of 660 (rounded to nearest day) certainly not his “heart of the 1111 days awakeningstimeframe” (which seems to be just 1111 divided by 2 then rounded up) and “'Outwards'” of 14490 just over 13 times his “1111 awakeningstimeframe”


So the proportion of his “Outwards” over his “Inwards” for any orbit is just about 22.
p²(2^-1-2^-1p^-2)^-1

 

[Daylightstar]

Xp² is an expression.
Xp² = Y is an equation.

This equation is true for any value of variable X.
In Dutch's use of this expression/equation, it is the variable Y with which he does his utterly meaningless and irrational numerology.

 

[The Man]

Xp² is an expression.
Xp² = Y is an equation.

This equation is true for any value of variable X.
In Dutch's use of this expression/equation, it is the variable Y with which he does his utterly meaningless and irrational numerology.

My apologies, I thought it was obvious that the expressions given were being equated to Dutch’s “’Inwards’” (I_P) and “'Outwards'” points (O_P) respectively, but I have no problems making corrections for clarity.

I_P = X(2^-1-2^-1p^-2)

O_P = Xp²
(Again where X represents the orbital period of the object being considered in earth days)

Also I further respectfully submit that his “meaningless and irrational numerology” is done both in the expressions as well as with the results (variable Y) with equally and invariably meaningless and irrational, well, results.

 

[Daylightstar]

Thanks The Man
Your are absolutely entirely correct. Dutch is 'doing' the independant variable X as well, with his otherworldly orbital periods in earthdays.
Not to mention his choice and use of Pi.

 

[Little 10 Toes]

How come Dutch didn't warn anyone about the Chilean earthquake?

Headline: Major 7.1 magnitude earthquake hits Chile
Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40879694/ns/world_news-americas/?gt1=43001

 

[Blue Mountain]

How come Dutch didn't warn anyone about the Chilean earthquake?

Headline: Major 7.1 magnitude earthquake hits Chile
Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40879694/ns/world_news-americas/?gt1=43001

Apparently HDD doesn't seem to work very well in South America. Or the Netherlands hasn't had a need to send a UN peacekeeping team there.

 

[Dutch]

man, you are using the synodic period, while as you know the orbital correlations in HDDesign are always based on sidereal. The real orbital period of 2009 HC82, the duration of a full orbit, is 3.39 years

 

[Blue Mountain]

man, you are using the synodic period, while as you know the orbital correlations in HDDesign are always based on sidereal. The real orbital period of 2009 HC82, the duration of a full orbit, is 3.39 years

It doesn't matter which orbital period you choose. You're doing exactly what the astrologers and numerologists do: data mining and anomaly hunting. While you have demonstrated a few remarkable coincidences, you have yet to convince us there is anything useful in them. You also have a tendency to ignore the misses.

Another issue I see is every time you have one of your "OMG! This JUST jumped out at me!" moments, you fail to go back over your data to see if the same set of circumstances produced a similar result. My guess it it wouldn't happen very often. A whole series of "OMG!" moments is worth much less than a single such event which is them shown to happen consistently; that is, you can show it happened in the past and based on that predict within a certain error range that it will happen again in the future.

 

[The Man]

man, you are using the synodic period, while as you know the orbital correlations in HDDesign are always based on sidereal. The real orbital period of 2009 HC82, the duration of a full orbit, is 3.39 years

“man”? Just whom are you referring to? If you intended to direct this at me then it is ‘The Man’ that should have preferenced your remarks. Please show where the period given is specifically claimed to be synodic. What on Earth makes you think the given period is synodic and not draconitic, anomalistic, tropical or perhaps even, say, sidereal? Get real Dutch.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synodic_period

• The sidereal period is the temporal cycle that it takes an object to make one full orbit, relative to the stars. This is considered to be an object's true orbital period.

Without a specific reference otherwise a given orbital period is considered to be the sidereal period. Both NASA and I know this even if you don’t.

 

[Dutch]

Well,

according to the comet catalog in order of day of perihelion on Earth, which is synodic, next perihelion of 2009 HC82 is November 10, 2012

http://www.aerith.net/comet/catalog/index-T-earth.html#2012

your 1468 days prior gives perihelion again as seen from Earth, November 3, 2008:

http://www.aerith.net/comet/catalog/index-T-earth.html#2008

sidereal orbit:

2009 HC82 was discovered on April 29th by the highly successful Catalina Sky Survey, and after independent observations by five different groups, it was determined that the asteroid has an orbit of 3.39 years and that its orbit is very inclined. So inclined in fact that the asteroid’s orbit takes it well out of the Solar System ecliptic at an angle of 155°. Inclined orbits aren’t rare in themselves, but if you find an asteroid with an inclination of more than 90°, you are seeing a very rare type of object: a retrograde asteroid.
http://www.universetoday.com/30261/2009-hc82-an-eccentric-and-backward-asteroid/
or new scientist:
http://www.newscientist.com/article...backwards.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news

 

[Mister Earl]

Still not seeing Dutch list any of his promised math. Dutch, when will you get around to walking us through one of your calculations, step by step, along with explanations on why you use what numbers and formulas that you do?

 

[The Man]

Well,

according to the comet catalog in order of day of perihelion on Earth, which is synodic, next perihelion of 2009 HC82 is November 10, 2012

http://www.aerith.net/comet/catalog/index-T-earth.html#2012

your 1468 days prior gives perihelion again as seen from Earth, November 3, 2008:

http://www.aerith.net/comet/catalog/index-T-earth.html#2008

Well what, are you claiming that you are using the synodic period now?

It isn’t my 1468 days, it is NASA/JPL’s.

Has it never occrued to you that an orbit might change and that the position of the perihelion of an orbit can shift (as Mercury’s does)?

Did you even read the article I cited above?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synodic_period

• The anomalistic period is the time that elapses between two passages of an object at its periapsis (in the case of the planets in the solar system, called the perihelion), the point of its closest approach to the attracting body. It differs from the sidereal period because the object's semimajor axis typically advances slowly.

Are you now claiming that you are using the anomalistic period, as you seem focused on the perihelion now.

sidereal orbit:

2009 HC82 was discovered on April 29th by the highly successful Catalina Sky Survey, and after independent observations by five different groups, it was determined that the asteroid has an orbit of 3.39 years and that its orbit is very inclined. So inclined in fact that the asteroid’s orbit takes it well out of the Solar System ecliptic at an angle of 155°. Inclined orbits aren’t rare in themselves, but if you find an asteroid with an inclination of more than 90°, you are seeing a very rare type of object: a retrograde asteroid.
http://www.universetoday.com/30261/2009-hc82-an-eccentric-and-backward-asteroid/
or new scientist:
http://www.newscientist.com/article...backwards.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news

Two articles from May 0f 2009 both of which actually include the NASA/JPL illustration of the orbit. Get real Dutch and get the current data from NASA/JPL. Why are you using data from 20 months ago when new data is available? Why is it that it seems you do not even know what period you are using sidereal, synodic or anomalistic? Your focus on the dates of the passage of the perihelion would tend to indicate the anomalistic period.


ETA:
Sort that Comet Catalog in order of Day of Perihelion as opposed to the order of Day of Perihelion (on earth) and you will find 2009 HC82 on the same dates 1,468 days apart.

If you check the profile for the 2009 HC82 comet you will find that it was last updated August 1 2010 (probably from the NASA/JPL data updated July 23 2010).

 

[Dutch]

fact is, that the orbit of 2009 HC82 was initially determined at 3,39 days. An orbit showing these Pi based correlations ( inwards and outwards ) with the 1111 days awakeningsrtimeframe as explained. That's how it became part of consciousness.
2009 HC82 has yet to complete its first full orbit after discovery and indeed the orbital data could change.
The thought was to apply Pi on this specific initial 'awakenings' orbit, with the expected perihelion as marker. When doing so, these 2 dates showed up as explained, giving instant 'confirmation'.

This is how this HDDesign 'research' works, identifying patterns by intuitive thoughts and synchronocoties, giving instant 'confirmation'.

If the real orbit is also 1468 days as the latest update seems to indicate, than its worth to give that a look too. In that case the 2 Pi points are around August 25, 2010, which is also on the timeline for Q3 2010 with the underlying 'contact' theme ( http://hddesign.forumup.nl/viewtopic.php?t=408&mforum=hddesign ) and around upcoming January 20, 2011.

I'll keep an eye on it

 

[Dutch]

I the meanwhile, this weekend Mars Express will flyby Phobos again, with its closest approach. I wonder if new orbital data of Phobos will become available to the public. Remember, Phobos orbit is in decay and orbital period is closing in on 1/Pi. Last available data showed Phobos is less than a minute off.

 

[Paul]

Dutch, how do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you can't even admit to a simple error of research?

You were wrong, therefore you calculations were incorrect and claiming it is part of the system just because you mentioned it is, at the very least, silly.

You were informed of your error and you proceeded to compound it by refusing to accept the situation, implying that we were wrong instead. Now, you accept the new data as if nothing happened and merely say "I'll keep an eye on it".