Of course I accept that for the more discerning posters on this thread some suitable testing would be needed before accepting my hypothesis. In fact, by using the word hypothesis, I am placing myself in the way of critical thought. But any sane person must agree that much of the dross that has been aimed at me falls well short of the scientific definition of 'critical'. I am presently working on some 'control' data sets, just six from the Hebrew up to now. I am doing my best to read into them as creatively as possible since the idea, as I understand it, is to show that the Genesis Seal is no more unusual than should be expected. Up to now, I have chosen two sets of three 28-letter verses from the Hebrew Torah. In one set, all the full-verse Gematria totals have a distinctive geometrical characteristic. The others have no such attributes. But I am putting them all through the same process. I can declare already that I am finding some structure that some observers could interpret as 'organised', but up to now nothing like the quantity and organisation I have presented for the Genesis Seal. I think I am being objectively creative, or at least I'm doing my best to be.
The problem is, it is not sufficient to merely attempt, on the alternative grids, the same processes that "worked" (produced interesting-looking results) on your Genesis Seal. Because you selected those processes, out of a potentially enormous space of
possible processes, specifically
because they worked on the Genesis Seal.
Say you find a 16-ounce can of Hanover pinto beans in your local supermarket. You hypothesize that such cans are extremely rare. To test that hypothesis, you choose a dozen other supermarkets and look for cans
in the exact same shelf location within the store as the ones you found back home. You don't find any 16-ounce cans of Hanover pinto beans in any of those spots, although one of them does have 16-ounce bags of dried store brand kidney beans there. Would you be correct in concluding that your initial hypothesis, that 16-ounce cans of Hanover pinto beans are extremely rare, has been confirmed? That's the error you risk making here. You aren't searching nearly as large a space in your control tests.
It's not sufficient to only try what worked before. You must try
all the possibilities you tried before. Since you've been working on the Seal for years, that's not going to be easy, nor is it going to be easy (or likely to happen) for any of us to spend years finding an equal amount of stuff in some other control grid. But the direct initial comparisons that can be made are looking good for our null hypothesis. The sheer number of words does seem to be larger in the MRC Secret Seal, and the complete meaningful instructional sentence I found (joining with other relevant words in a prominent symmetrical pattern) without any further manipulation of the grid has comparable if not superior aesthetic qualities and apparent improbability to anything you found in the Genesis Seal prior to any of your additional manipulations of it.
Don't compare that to how much "content" you ultimately found in the Genesis Seal, using all sorts of processes and interpretations (patterns of distributions of specific letters, patterns of types of letters, words found in non-linear paths or clusters or "geometric" arrangements of letters, further rearrangement of the grid, numeric values such as binary powers that are only significant to modern culture, anything that can be construed as a reference to any part of the Torah), after searching and fiddling with it for years. Instead, compare it to how much you found in the Genesis Seal, in just the original arrangement (which is most likely just one of multiple arrangements you tried, starting out) in the first ten minutes you looked at it, because that's about how long I spent.
Respectfully,
Myriad
