Hyper Dimensional Design

[Dutch]

It has been the same valid point over and over that you ignore. Namely, you cherry pick your data.

For example, earlier you linked your timeline to an earthquake and proclaimed it a significant hit. I pointed out that similar sized earthquakes occur nearly every single day. So, how can one earthquake be significant while dozens of others are ignored?

You are referrring to the 8.4 Sumatra quake on September 12. I have already outlined why this quake is significant with my November 15 HD Cube analysis that gives predictions for these future Phi points too.

If you want to be taken seriously you need to do some things that people have been asking for from the beginning of this thread.

1) Define what is a significant event.

an event that can be identified as a valid expression of expected themes on specific moments in our perspective of time. That could be high impact or subtle

2) List all significant events within a given time frame.

these events are monitored with the timelines I use

3) Show any significance of the intervals between related events.

that depends on the timecoded pattern on which the underlying themes find its expression in our reality, so what do you mean here exactly?

What you are doing is prejudging what dates should be significant, then finding anything on that date to create your match. The problem being that equaly significant events like the ones you highlight are occuring all over the intervals between your 3840 days (or whatever time frame you are looking at).

I identify a future timeframe that could give expression of specific underlying themes. It does not happen everyday that the Pope dies, the birdflu breaks out or Tolimir is arrested. In fact every single event could be put into perspective if you have the time to do so and if you have a complete understanding of the underlying Design. I only use a few limited elements of described Design and the 'coincidences' already jump off the screen. If you want to judge what I am doing than you have to follow my postings on the tim eline realtime

It would be like me saying that since a red car was in an accident on Monday this week and Monday last week it is proof of an underlying design. Well not realy, since if I bothered to check I would likely find that red cars are involved in accidents every day, just like other color cars.

and why is a period of a week significant? I use elements of Design that give recurring 'coincidental' expressions of expected related events.

But that is what you are doing. You pick an event, then you pick some time interval and go looking for a related event on that interval. But your mistake is that you are not also looking at how many times related events are occuring off your desired interval alignments.

so that means that a complete understanding of the underlying Design could indicate even more related events, if they are indeed related.

That is your cherry picking of the data. And that is what makes it all meaningless. And that is what you keep ignoring.

that remains to be seen. Obviously you have missed the 'in the face' moments when these odd 'coincidences' occur on the expected keydates.
You should keep an eye on the timelines very closely if you think that you can dismiss this as meaningless, or you give it a rest

 

[Paul]

OK, try wriggling out of this again:

Some time ago, July in fact, I posted a list of dates which relate to each other and to a theme you say is important; all you have to do is tell us how the dates are connected and demonstrate how this fits exactly with the appropriate time line. Four months should be plenty of time to work out something this easy.

 

[Dutch]

Do you mean this list of random dates?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2807796&postcount=303


And you are asking me how these dates relate?

 

[Paul]

Do you mean this list of random dates?

Those dates are far from random, they have a very specific connection and, as I have said several times, should fit exactly with a theme you claim to be important.

Now, enough prevarication, show us the data.

 

[sts60]

...As a confirmation in the ‘as above – so below’ Design of our reality it was Cassini again that closed this HD Cube timeframe with a fly by around Titan, tipping in the atmosphere.
Cassini marked the Phi point and closes the window. ...

What exactly do you mean by "tipping in the atmosphere"?

Which flyby of Titan? And why exactly is that flyby of Titan more significant than the other three dozen or so flybys of Titan that Cassini has executed so far?

Why exactly is a Cassini flyby of Earth significant? Why exactly is it more significant than its flybys (two) of Venus? Or Jupiter?

Why exactly is it more significant than either of Galileo's two flybys of Earth?

Why did you consider significant the release of three smoke detectors' worth of radiation from a Japanese power plant back in July? You never answered that question.

Why, if the "two major themes of our times" are "don't mess with nuclear power and stay out of space", is the exploration of space with nuclear power sources (radioisotope generators and heaters) so fantastically successful? (The U.S., in particular, has launched dozens of such generators, and not one has ever failed to perform as designed; Voyager 1 and 2, for example, are still working quite well three decades after launch.) You never answered that question.

Why exactly did you cherry-pick a 1951 date for the first nuclear reactor
when the first was in 1942? Why exactly would either be more significant then the first fission reactors on Earth, which operated naturally a couple of billion years ago? You never responded to that point.

 

[Dutch]

Those dates are far from random, they have a very specific connection and, as I have said several times, should fit exactly with a theme you claim to be important.

Now, enough prevarication, show us the data.

you must be kidding here, are you asking me to read your mind or something?

 

[Dutch]

What exactly do you mean by "tipping in the atmosphere"?

Cassini took samples of Titan's atmosphere during the fly by. These words were used by NASA on the Fly By homepage

Which flyby of Titan? And why exactly is that flyby of Titan more significant than the other three dozen or so flybys of Titan that Cassini has executed so far?

All orbitting and rotating elements in our solarsystem are significant, man-made or 'natural', as I consider our solar system to be a 3D counterpart in a multidimensional system. That's what this HDDesign is about. This fly by was significant for this specific timeframe as it marked the start of the Phi point connection back in August 1999 with a cassini Earth fly by, pinpointing at this HD Cube timeframe with a Titan fly by with the same space craft, intelligently connected as calculated by this Phi point.During october Octahedron timeframe was another fly bythat was also mentioned on the timeline. You cannot expect me to put all that happens in our reality into perspective, so I have no opinion on the other fly by's yet

Why exactly is a Cassini flyby of Earth significant? Why exactly is it more significant than its flybys (two) of Venus? Or Jupiter?

All that happens in our solarsystem is interesting as I said above, these events can help us identifying the hidden underlying Design.

Why exactly is it more significant than either of Galileo's two flybys of Earth?

I would like to understand all these events, so I don't think we should talk about more or less significant. The events at HD macro level orientation seems more important because they are unveiling the hidden design more easily for us

Why did you consider significant the release of three smoke detectors' worth of radiation from a Japanese power plant back in July? You never answered that question.

Well, its all explained in the breaking the code thread. It has to do with this disharmony in our solarsystem compared to the Golden Mean, translated in to this HD Tetrahedron based Design. There's an explanation of the perfect precession cycle and the deviation in comparisson with our actual perception of time. The difference between the 2 has been calculated and puts 'timedifference' between the 2 of more than 60 years during a precession cycle. When I found out about this difference I noticed that it would put a Hirhoshima-Nagasaki echo into our current times. The dates were already calculated during 2004 and were exactly determined as July 12 +/- 1 day for Hirhoshima and July 15 +/- 1 day for Nagasaki. I expected that something could happen to confirm this HDDesign so I had put it on the timeline for July.

There's no better way to express such an Nagasaki echo as what actually happened on July 16: A strong earthquake caused the worlds biggest nuclear plant to leak in Japan, coinciding with a very powerfull typhoon

maybe you should read this 'breaking the code' thread

Why, if the "two major themes of our times" are "don't mess with nuclear power and stay out of space", is the exploration of space with nuclear power sources (radioisotope generators and heaters) so fantastically successful? (The U.S., in particular, has launched dozens of such generators, and not one has ever failed to perform as designed; Voyager 1 and 2, for example, are still working quite well three decades after launch.) You never answered that question.

It depends on what you consider to be succesfull. Both space shuttles for instances were taken out directly linked to nuclear activity in space. Also, I talk about the misuse of nuclear power so you have to think about actual nuclear detonations in the first place. There's a difference between using a nuclear power source or detonating a device.

Why exactly did you cherry-pick a 1951 date for the first nuclear reactor
when the first was in 1942? Why exactly would either be more significant then the first fission reactors on Earth, which operated naturally a couple of billion years ago? You never responded to that point.

I did not cherry pick, the timecoded pattern pinpointed at that specific date back in time, coinciding with that nuclear 'event' to confirm the underlying theme. These other events will probably pop up too sooner or later if they are indeed part of timecoded patterns that are identified

 

[Paul]

you must be kidding here, are you asking me to read your mind or something?

So, given a list of specific dates, each linked to the next with an underlying theme, you are entirely unable to say anything. However, wait until some unimportant event has already happened and you can magically fit it into some pattern which you claim gives that date importance.

It would appear that you have revealed the complete and utter pointlessness of your system.




Again.

 

[Molinaro]

So, let's say I take a handfull of pennies and throw them on the ground. Then, I look at the arrangement of pennies and pick out 4 of them that mark the corners of a square.

Does that mean there is some underlying design that aligned those 4 pennies?

Or, does it simply mean that the square relationship between those pennies is only apparent when I ignore the many other pennies that are lying about?


Again, this is analogous to what you just said. You are ignoring the many other Titan flybys by Cassini. The only reason you can point to any significance in this one flyby and the flyby of earth is because you are ingoring all the other data points.

Again let me emphasize this point. Ignoring data because it doesn't fit your desired outcome makes your desired outcome meaningless nonsense!

Wake the heck up and stop wasting your time.

 

[sts60]

Cassini took samples of Titan's atmosphere during the fly by. These words were used by NASA on the Fly By homepage

No, that's not correct. It was the Huygens descent probe. Cassini is not designed for operation in planetary atmospheres and carries no such instruments. It's no big deal, really, except that it indicates you are completely unfamiliar with a subject about which you are making extraordinary claims.

All orbitting and rotating elements in our solarsystem are significant, man-made or 'natural', as I consider our solar system to be a 3D counterpart in a multidimensional system. That's what this HDDesign is about. This fly by was significant for this specific timeframe as it marked the start of the Phi point connection back in August 1999 with a cassini Earth fly by, pinpointing at this HD Cube timeframe with a Titan fly by with the same space craft, intelligently connected as calculated by this Phi point.

I'm not interested in math games based on faulty empirical assumptions. I asked you what made this flyby more significant than the dozens of other flybys.

During october Octahedron timeframe was another fly bythat was also mentioned on the timeline. You cannot expect me to put all that happens in our reality into perspective, so I have no opinion on the other fly by's yet

I know you can play meaningless math games to come up with connections for any event, no matter how trivial. Can't you see that this is the classic indicator of the uselessness of such astronumerology? I'm trying to help you here.

All that happens in our solarsystem is interesting as I said above, these events can help us identifying the hidden underlying Design.

In other words, you have no explanation for why one particular flyby is more significant than all the others.

I would like to understand all these events, so I don't think we should talk about more or less significant. The events at HD macro level orientation seems more important because they are unveiling the hidden design more easily for us

Sorry, but you are the one claiming this event or that as "significant". A little late to back away from that now!

Well, its all explained in the breaking the code thread. It has to do with this disharmony in our solarsystem compared to the Golden Mean, ...
maybe you should read this 'breaking the code' thread

No. You did not answer the question: why exactly is the release of three smoke detectors' worth of radiation "significant"?

Bonus question: Why is such a trivial release significant but the release every day of far greater amounts of radiation from coal-fired power plants not significant?

It depends on what you consider to be succesfull.

No, it does not. Every single nuclear generator (41 RTGs, one reactor) and heat source (over two hundred RHUs) launched by the U.S. has functioned as designed. Even the four generator/heat sources in failed launches did what they were supposed to do.

Do you, or do you not, consider a 100% rate of operation as designed successful?

Both space shuttles for instances were taken out directly linked to nuclear activity in space.

No, they were not. Neither had anything whatsoever to do with nuclear power of any variety. You might as well claim they were "directly linked" to the activities of mimes, or the spreading of mustard on ham sandwiches, or the NBA games scheduled that day.

Also, I talk about the misuse of nuclear power so you have to think about actual nuclear detonations in the first place. There's a difference between using a nuclear power source or detonating a device.

Backpedaling noted, but irrelevant anyway. There has not been a nuclear detonation in space since 1962 - twenty-four years before the Challenger accident.

I did not cherry pick, the timecoded pattern pinpointed at that specific date back in time, coinciding with that nuclear 'event' to confirm the underlying theme. These other events will probably pop up too sooner or later if they are indeed part of timecoded patterns that are identified

In other words, you can play enough games with hypergibble to come up with a "significant" event for any date. We know the drill.

You still have not explained exactly why a 1951 reactor is more significant than the first reactor in 1942. Nor have you explained why either is more significant than the first fission reactors on Earth - the natural ones which operated about two billion years ago.

 

[Paulhoff]

you must be kidding here, are you asking me to read your mind or something?

Why not when you think of it, aren't you sayings that you have something that predicts the future and if not, why do we need you for the news.

Paul

 

[Molinaro]

No, that's not correct. It was the Huygens descent probe. Cassini is not designed for operation in planetary atmospheres and carries no such instruments. It's no big deal, really, except that it indicates you are completely unfamiliar with a subject about which you are making extraordinary claims.

Actualy Cassini did do an atmospheric analysis on this flyby. However it was not done by scooping a sample. The analysis was done by studying the effects on the communications with Cassini as those signals were occulted by the atmosphere, and by the moon itself.

 

[sts60]

Yes, the radio science experiments. Ironically, I was just looking over the proposed Jupiter System Observer investigation list (including its radio science experiments).

I jumped too hard on Dutch for that one, anyway, and I apologize. Moreover, although it is true that there is no "sample scooping" in the everyday sense, the Ion and Neutral Mass Spectrometer aboard Cassini does admit samples from the space environment, which includes the exoatmospheric regions of Saturn, Titan, and presumably other moons. It's still a vacuum to us humans, but that's not a distinction vital to that specific claim.

So, I retract the paragraph where I lambasted Dutch for the "sampling" claim. Whether or not he was really thinking of the descent probe, Cassini does sample the exoatmospheric regions, and the 2007 operations page even uses the word "sniffing".

The rest of my criticisms and questions stand.

 

[Molinaro]

A claim is made.
Evidence shows it to be in error.
The claim is retracted/corrected.

Any chance that lesson will rub off here?

 

[Dutch]

So, given a list of specific dates, each linked to the next with an underlying theme, you are entirely unable to say anything. However, wait until some unimportant event has already happened and you can magically fit it into some pattern which you claim gives that date importance.

It would appear that you have revealed the complete and utter pointlessness of your system.




Again.

Sorry Paul, this makes no sense. i have told several times that I'm not endlessly looking for connections with cherry picking. You give me a list of dates and I have to guess what theme has been expressed based on a specific undserlying timecoded pattern that is unknown to me? Come on, that's ridiculous. What is the underlying Design of these dates and what is the underlying theme? It takes alot more to identify a pattern and the underlying themes, the geometry needs to be understood first.
There are alot of examples in the HDDesign material of how these timecoded patterns emerge, like with the Pope, Arafat, Balkan karma etc.
Give these a look first and reconsider your question

 

[Dutch]

So, let's say I take a handfull of pennies and throw them on the ground. Then, I look at the arrangement of pennies and pick out 4 of them that mark the corners of a square.

Does that mean there is some underlying design that aligned those 4 pennies?

Or, does it simply mean that the square relationship between those pennies is only apparent when I ignore the many other pennies that are lying about?


Again, this is analogous to what you just said. You are ignoring the many other Titan flybys by Cassini. The only reason you can point to any significance in this one flyby and the flyby of earth is because you are ingoring all the other data points.

Again let me emphasize this point. Ignoring data because it doesn't fit your desired outcome makes your desired outcome meaningless nonsense!

Wake the heck up and stop wasting your time.

You completely disregard the fact that these correlations pop up instantly by intuitive thoughts or synchronicities. The sub conscious mind seem to be able to tune in on the underlying Design and themes. there are way to many 'coincidences' in the material to dismiss this. I'm not wasting my time, you will find out eventually

 

[Dutch]

Actualy Cassini did do an atmospheric analysis on this flyby. However it was not done by scooping a sample. The analysis was done by studying the effects on the communications with Cassini as those signals were occulted by the atmosphere, and by the moon itself.

Another close flyby of Titan is next on the agenda for the Cassini spacecraft. Cassini will again dip its toe into the atmosphere of Saturn's largest moon.

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/videos/video-details.cfm?videoID=165

the fly by in itself was the confirmation

 

[Dutch]

I'm not interested in math games based on faulty empirical assumptions. I asked you what made this flyby more significant than the dozens of other flybys.

because both marked the 2 points of the given Golden Mean Phi based spiral

 

[Dutch]

I know you can play meaningless math games to come up with connections for any event, no matter how trivial. Can't you see that this is the classic indicator of the uselessness of such astronumerology? I'm trying to help you here.

Help yourself by investigating this HDDesign material. The math is not a game but based on Platonic Solid geometry, Golden Mean and mathematical orbits. Any event can be put into perspective indeed, if one would have a complete understanding of ALL underlying Design in our reality. I don't think that's possible for the human mind, do you? However, this material is based on events that take place at macrolevel and the subconscious mind seems to be able to tune in. There are so many coincidences that occur on identified future dates that it really should make you think.

 

[Dutch]

funny that you say this sts60:

No, that's not correct. It was the Huygens descent probe. Cassini is not designed for operation in planetary atmospheres and carries no such instruments. It's no big deal, really, except that it indicates you are completely unfamiliar with a subject about which you are making extraordinary claims.

Besides the fact that is was indeed correct as Molinaro already said, there something interesting about this Huygens descent too. I wrote:

January 14, 2005 - The Huygens probe lands on Titan, the largest moon of Saturn.
Naturally, no one has ever seen a transit of Earth from Saturn, nor is this likely to happen in any foreseeable future. The last one took place on January 14, 2005 -- though the Cassini probe was present in the Saturn system, it was also the day of the Huygens probe mission.
Transit of Earth from Saturn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_of_Earth_from_Saturn
That moment of touch down was chosen!