Hyper Dimensional Design

[Paul]

Let's say we have a different level of understanding about this

We understand and you apparently have no idea.

 

[Paul]

I told you, you have to look at it from a Hyper Dimensionally point of view.

And yet you consistently fail to provide any evidence or maths for any aspect of hyper dimensionality.

The only refrence point that counts is the real orbital position translated to Earth days,

Back to actual position counting again?

regardles how this actual position of a planet looks like.

Ah, apparently cognitive dissonance rides again.

This is NOT astrology. an orbit is an orbit, period.

Oh dear.

 

[The Man]

I told you, you have to look at it from a Hyper Dimensionally point of view.

The only refrence point that counts is the real orbital position translated to Earth days, regardles how this actual position of a planet looks like. This is NOT astrology. an orbit is an orbit, period.

Actually as far as periods and orbits go there are several.

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

There are several kinds of orbital periods for objects around the Sun:

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

The synodic period is the time that it takes for the object to reappear at the same point in the sky, relative to the Sun, as observed from Earth; i.e. returns to the same elongation (and planetary phase). This is the time that elapses between two successive conjunctions with the Sun and is the object's Earth-apparent orbital period. The synodic period differs from the sidereal period since Earth itself revolves around the Sun.

The draconitic period is the time that elapses between two passages of the object at its ascending node, the point of its orbit where it crosses the ecliptic from the southern to the northern hemisphere. It differs from the sidereal period because the object's line of nodes typically precesses or recesses slowly.

The anomalistic period is the time that elapses between two passages of the object at its perihelion, the point of its closest approach to the Sun. It differs from the sidereal period because the object's semimajor axis typically precesses or recesses slowly.

The tropical period, finally, is the time that elapses between two passages of the object at right ascension zero. It is slightly shorter than the sidereal period because the vernal point precesses.

That you have chosen one, apparently the sidereal period, in fact relates your orbital positions and thus timeframes to the stars. You are not as far from astrology as you might like to think.

 

[AWPrime]

I suppose you have missed the death wish against me that has been expressed in this thread, so this polite request must be seen in perspective.

So what? Even if someone wishes you to fall dead, it doesn't excuse your babbling.

If you have to ignore the actual meaning of the words that you are using to make your argument then you have no understanding of your own 'theory' and/or no understanding of English.
Either way, in all cases I am left to wonder what the heck you are doing on a discussion forum? If you are here simply to stroke your own ego, then the best you can expect is pity.

Make sure you know what you are talking about before questioning my level of adultry.

As said by Paul your level is 'readily apparent'.

 

[The Man]

I suppose you have missed the death wish against me that has been expressed in this thread, so this polite request must be seen in perspective. Make sure you know what you are talking about before questioning my level of adultry.

How much 'adultery' you engage in is hardly the issue.

 

[Blue Mountain]

Because Deep Impact on July 4, 2005 and the flight 522 crash on August 14, 2005 were already linked to Tunguskain the 'communication' that has been outlined in previous posts. I expected an important event on July 7, 2005 as you can review. The next synchronicity that shows up is this very same orbittal position again ( July 7, 1947 Roswell)

I did a quick review of this thread and noticed the first and only place you linked Tunguska and flight 522 was just a little while ago in post #1635, in amongst a whole pile of words:

So Tunguska happened at THE moment in order to mark the Phi point between Tunguska and Deep Impact. This phipoint marks the moment that it was decided to uses nuclear arms on Japan.
This 'Hirshosima crash' ( reread previous posts about the identification ) happened on August 6 2005, THE moment with at Phi point in between Tunguska the moment the military order to use nuclear weapons was given
So both Tunguska and the Hirhoshima crash on August 6, 2005 happened on an intelligently Designed moment in our perception of time, marking Deep Impact and the political decision and mission orders to use nuclear arms on Hirhoshima-Nagasaki.
And now the signifigance of flight 522 ‘running on autopilot towards nuclear event’ crash in Marathon, Greece, becomes clear in full force:
Tunguska and flight 522 crash are marking at Phi point:
August 6, 1945 – detonation of an atomic bomb on Hirhoshima !!!!!!
Now lets see what has happened during this Easter weekend because I expected a related event. Flight 522 was flying on autopilot with the pilots and passengers frozen to death.

I completely fail to see how you are linking (via HDD arithmetic) The Tunguska--Deep Impact timeline and the Flight 522 timeline. Indeed, in the portion I just quoted, you merely state they are related without showing how you arrived at the conclusion that they are.

In addition, and this has been pointed out to you in the past, the victims of flight 522 did not freeze to death. The aircraft exploded on impact, and the passengers were either killed in the impact or in the fire that followed.

 

[Blue Mountain]

I told you, I am not going to review the thread and count them for you.

Do you think I have all my tens of thousands of posts about this material available in my head for an instant repost?

Herein is my major complaint about your entire approach:

You are not approaching your investigation in systematic fashion. You research is sloppy and you do not attempt to keep careful track of timelines, inferences, predictions, and results.

I talk about the security issues as listed before and followed with the next one afterwards. You are probably right there are 6 of them, I can't recall exactly and it is indeed irrelevant. What I was saying that there's a sequence going on giving expression of this sucurity issues since Obama was put on a very early protection of the secret services.

That was the reason I pointed out the discrepancy in the number of Obama security issues. I was pretty certain you had not carefully documented the Obama security timeline, in the same way you do not document anything about HDD in a filing system or anything else that lets you review your data. Thus when I pointed out the discrepancy, you had no way to look back in your records on the timeline ... because you are not keeping any!

If you are forcing me to name them from my memory I can give it a try but it is irrelevant, I'm not going to spen my time in reviewing before posting.

(Bolding mine) The term for that (on this board at least) is EPIC FAIL.

Doing good research means taking a scientific approach. That means (in part) careful data collection, good record keeping, and reviews of data to ensure everything is still on track. And even with that, the material is then submitted for peer review to ensure the data collection, record keeping, reviews and analysis were all done rigorously.

Your failure to investigate HDD systematically is partly what is preventing you from seeing that which is readily apparent to everyone else reading this thread: HDD has no grounding in reality, does not explain anything, does not predict anything, and overall is a colossal waste of your time.

If you don't understand why taking a scientific approach is useful, you should turn off your computer, then cancel your internet service along with your electricity, gas, and telephone service. (And sell your automobile and ride a horse instead.) Because it was science that brought you those things, not endless pouring over mountains of stuff looking for "OMG!!" moments. That approach leads you into blind alleys like astrology.

This material is posted 'live' , in between normal daily work and without endlesly looking for correlations

Wrong; all you're doing is endlesly looking for correlations.

 

[Blue Mountain]

I suppose you have missed the death wish against me that has been expressed in this thread <snip>

That's a pretty serious accusation to make against a fellow board member. Which post was it in? And did you report it to the mods?

 

[Dutch]

Blue..........

I completely fail to see how you are linking (via HDD arithmetic) The Tunguska--Deep Impact timeline and the Flight 522 timeline. Indeed, in the portion I just quoted, you merely state they are related without showing how you arrived at the conclusion that they are.

How is that possible?

It is posted several times here. Deep Impact and Tunguska have the decision to use nuclear weapons at Phi point. Flight 522 crash and Tunguska the actual timefram of the irhoshima-Nagasaki detonations

 

[Dutch]

You are not approaching your investigation in systematic fashion. You research is sloppy and you do not attempt to keep careful track of timelines, inferences, predictions, and results.

No I'm not, because I do my 'research' based on intuitive thoughts and synchronicities.

 

[Dutch]

That was the reason I pointed out the discrepancy in the number of Obama security issues. I was pretty certain you had not carefully documented the Obama security timeline, in the same way you do not document anything about HDD in a filing system or anything else that lets you review your data. Thus when I pointed out the discrepancy, you had no way to look back in your records on the timeline ... because you are not keeping any!

What do you expect? I use the timeslines so it can be reviewed.

If the 'Obama security issue' would be the only thing that matters in my life it would probably a good to set up a filing system. Its just not possible for me to do so, there's so much in this HDDesign material

 

[Dutch]

Doing good research means taking a scientific approach. That means (in part) careful data collection, good record keeping, and reviews of data to ensure everything is still on track. And even with that, the material is then submitted for peer review to ensure the data collection, record keeping, reviews and analysis were all done rigorously.

HDDesign is not about scientific research, how many times do I have to say that

Your failure to investigate HDD systematically is partly what is preventing you from seeing that which is readily apparent to everyone else reading this thread: HDD has no grounding in reality, does not explain anything, does not predict anything, and overall is a colossal waste of your time.

These 'coincidences' and synchronicities popping up in this 'research' show the contrarairy, you just don't want to see that

We will see what is to be considered a waste of time

 

[Dutch]

If you don't understand why taking a scientific approach is useful, you should turn off your computer, then cancel your internet service along with your electricity, gas, and telephone service. (And sell your automobile and ride a horse instead.) Because it was science that brought you those things, not endless pouring over mountains of stuff looking for "OMG!!" moments. That approach leads you into blind alleys like astrology.

Since when is our scientific knowledge providing answers to the meaning or intelligent correlations in our reality?

 

[Dutch]

That's a pretty serious accusation to make against a fellow board member. Which post was it in? And did you report it to the mods?

post 641, Paulhof thinks you all should hound me to death:

BECAUSE YOU SHOW NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING THAT MAKES THESE SO-CALLED PREDICTIONS THAT ANYONE ELSE CAN DUPIATE. AND I THINK ALL HERE SHOULD HOUND YOU TO DEATH WHEN THAT DATE COMES AND GOES AND NOTHING NEW HAPPENS TO HIM AND THAT IT IS JUST ANOTHER DAY OF COMA FOR HIM.


Paul

I did not report it no

says enough about his level

although he has a slightly different viewpoint:

Paulhoff:

Yes, and I'm getting tired of looking down so far.

selfexplanatory

 

[AWPrime]

No I'm not, because I do my 'research' based on intuitive thoughts and synchronicities.

In the normal world we call this delusions.

 

[Paul]

What do you expect? I use the timeslines so it can be reviewed.

Except when asked to review it you say there's too much information that you haven't bothered to organise in any meaningful way.

If the 'Obama security issue' would be the only thing that matters in my life it would probably a good to set up a filing system. Its just not possible for me to do so, there's so much in this HDDesign material

That's a very poor excuse; you have a computer and an internet connection, you therefore have access to free software that will allow you to do almost anything with your data.

Too much data, not important enough or not enough time all illustrate the generally haphazard and incoherent approach you take.

 

[Paulhoff]

No I'm not, because I do my 'research' based on intuitive thoughts and synchronicities.

Sounds like religion, sounds like wishful thinking, and sounds like why millions died in death camps.

Paul



Dutch, this thread does not in any way belong in "Science, Medicine and Technology" and it is a Travesty that it is.

 

[dafydd]

Daffyd, please do not quote huge posts in their entirety only to add a single line to the end. Thanks.

Not even to prove a point?

 

[Blue Mountain]

Blue..........

How is that possible?

It is posted several times here. Deep Impact and Tunguska have the decision to use nuclear weapons at Phi point. Flight 522 crash and Tunguska the actual timefram of the irhoshima-Nagasaki detonations

I took a close look at post #1635. Here are my observations:

• The presentation is horrible. Formatted at 80 characters/line, it's over 500 lines of text. But paragraphs are not correctly delineated, nor are the sections that originate as quotes from other posts properly separated from sections that are original to the post itself. These make for very difficult reading and parsing of your argument. Your poor presentation is the major reason most people here just skim over these walls of text.
• The post contains several factual errors, such as the date on which it was decided to use the nuclear bomb against Japan, and your comment that people on flight 522 froze to death
• A critical point in your argument is that "Tunguska happened at THE moment in order to mark the Phi point between Tunguska and Deep Impact. This phipoint marks the moment that it was decided to uses nuclear arms on Japan." But that is factually incorrect, because the decision was taken prior to August 2, 1945. The issuing of the military orders is pro forma; that is, it is is a minor and expected part of the sequence of events between the important dates: the decision to use the bomb and the actual use of it.

Very late into post #1635 you say,

So both Tunguska and the Hirhoshima crash on August 6, 2005 happened on an intelligently Designed moment in our perception of time, marking Deep Impact and the political decision and mission orders to use nuclear arms on Hirhoshima-Nagasaki.

And now the signifigance of flight 522 ‘running on autopilot towards nuclear event’ crash in Marathon, Greece, becomes clear in full force:

Tunguska and flight 522 crash are marking at Phi point: August 6, 1945 – detonation of an atomic bomb on Hirhoshima !!!!!!

Now lets see what has happened during this Easter weekend because I expected a
related event. Flight 522 was flying on autopilot with the pilots and passengers frozen to death.

Besides this emerging nuclear conflict with Korea with it space launch I noticed this on the same CNN main page when I was monitoring this timeframe ...

All right: flight 522 represents "running on autopilot toward nuclear winter" (or devastation, or event -- you've used all three). The Tunguska/Deep Impact timeline has a nuclear event on it, albeit tenuously. The link is nuclear armaments and the fact that North Korea is wanting to build one, too.

Here's my beef. You did not in any way answer my question about why you linked Flight 522 to the Tunguska/Hiroshima/Deep Impact timeline (the answer which I just gave above.) Instead you merely whined that we couldn't see something that you said was obvious.

I submit to you that we couldn't see it because you had buried the important linkages in a morass of verbiage. If people are asking you questions about things you've said, one reason because you're not being clear, as post #1635 shows all too well.

 

[Dutch]

In the normal world we call this delusions.

in your limited and rigid perspective of reality your right