It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Timewave Zero - Countdown to Transition

page: 171
575
<< 168  169  170    172  173  174 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Zagari
 


None of these graphs are reliable. All of them are a sham. All are based on arbitrary decisions.




posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Can you explain why is that so? I think mathematics are involved...
www.fractal-timewave.com...

www.levity.com...

Is this arbitrary?



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Zagari
 


Link 1. The first page is used to make some definitions. Then it is shown that the sum is bounded. I did not check the math so much as determined the gist. At the end we do not have the TWZ.

Link 2. First link nothing. Second link nothing. I quit at this point since nothing of interest was posted in the math.

The use of the King Wen sequence is arbitrary.
The use of the differences is arbitrary.



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
I noticed big novelty points are not a good time to take any risk: have you seen the IndyCar World Championship today? 15 cars involved, on fire, and 1 dead.
This may happen because during novelty things are unexpected and precarious.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologistIf people actually want to test the graph they should be looking for events that falsify the graph. In other words look at sequences that are reductions in novelty and see what lies there. Those are the parts of the graph that appear to be overlooked - possibly on purpose.


Relies on being able to quantify novelty - something we admit can't be done yet.

What sort of sequence would show a reduction in novelty over time? To me that would imply something become less complex, less connected over time.

Besides the forces of entropy which are ubiquitous, I can't think of anything which would fit this description. The whole point of novelty is that things increase in novelty over time. If you can think of something which shows less novelty over time I am willing to hear it.

Obviously each individual event becomes less novel over time, but I am talking about sequences of events - progression of technology for example - which become less novel with each one. I don't think this is possible.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 01:55 AM
link   
when did countdown begin?

the day the thread was created? Do we all starting counting backwards from 2012?

is there a date we start counting down on?

if so, which one and what are we up to?



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Thurisaz
 


We are in a time cycle that started August 6 1945. The cycle ends December 2 2011. There will be another time cycle that will go on until December 15 2012, than another one that will last until December 21 2012.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Zagari
 


ok well thx for educating me...but 1945 is not 2012 days ??

I just don't get the 'counting down the days'



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Zagari
 


How can you tie a headline into novelty. Crashes are not rare or unusual.

Here is a list of the 10 big NASCAR crashes.
www.popularmechanics.com...



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Cecilofs
 



What sort of sequence would show a reduction in novelty over time? To me that would imply something become less complex, less connected over time.

When the graph moves up, isn't that showing a reduction in novelty? Loss of complexity and connectedness happens. Natural disasters do that all of the time.


If you can think of something which shows less novelty over time I am willing to hear it.

Fires, hurricanes, etc. that reduce the connectedness should be reducing this poorly defined concept of novelty.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Zagari
 


Since when does the cycle begin on August 6, 1945. When McKenna changed his end date to match the long count date he also shifted away from the date of the A-bomb.

What I don't understand is why the date is not July 16, 1945 when the first A-bomb was exploded. I guess when everything is an arbitrary decision, then anything goes.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Novelty is also meant to be unexpected, UNpredictable events. Don't tell me that kind of crash was predictable that day.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Evidently August 6 1945 is the day everybody saw the consequences of nuclear attacks. You should know that that date was chosen because it replicated the big bang. No other date, according to Mckenna was representing the big bang.
August 6 was public. That is the answer, I guess.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Zagari
 


Do you realize how many crashes there are in races? There are around 200 a year. That is in a 36 race season. That's over 5 crashes a race on average.

2009 - 195
2008 - 211

Dead in 2011
en.wikipedia.org...
Jackson Bert
Matthew Marker
Gustavo Sondermann
Dan Wheldon

Four dead this year hundreds listed on the site I linked to and you said

Don't tell me that kind of crash was predictable that day.

I say, what about of the others you chose to overlook just to support the TWZ graph. Are you cherry picking?



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Can you give your definition of novelty? In your opinion, what should a novel event represent/ be characterized of to be called as such ( " novel " )?
What are the kind of events that you would define as novel?



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   
I suppose I could add that it appeared to be a deadly weekend in general,.
Many accidents in the area near my residence. some fatal, however I was hearing
more than usual ambulance and rescue activity with in the last 5 days..
edit on 17-10-2011 by Lil Drummerboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Zagari
 


My definition would not be useful since the graph is supposed to be plotting McKenna's definition of novel.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 05:35 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Yep fair call, though in some situations disasters can bring people closer together as well, or be novel for other reasons.

I was thinking that you meant a series of events which become less novel e.g. Development of computers with each new invention being less novel than the last.


The problem is that in any given period both novel and less novel events will happen, I guess you'd have to look at the overall rate of novel vs less novel events and also the overall rate of change across the planet (at every scale, in every different way).

Picking a few random natural disasters would be cherry picking as well. You'd have to plot every natural disaster to see if there is a strong correlation. Since that is impossible with the time and resources I am willing/able to dedicate to this theory, its not gonna happen.

At any rate - its "Countdown to Transition" because TWZ theory claims that, basically, time is going to end on Dec 21, 2012. So we are counting down till that date. Feel free to count forwards or backwards from whichever time period you want

edit on 18-10-2011 by Cecilofs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Have you noticed? The days between September 11 2001 and December 21 2012 are almost eactly the sum of 64 per 64 times, with a difference of 20 days to add to this sum, anyway, less than 64 per 65 days.

64 is a pattern of timewave zero.

The resonance of 9/11 in 2012 occurs 64 days before December 21 2012.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Zagari
 


My definition would not be useful since the graph is supposed to be plotting McKenna's definition of novel.


And his definition is completely arbitrary...like, he uses completely random events just to "make it fit".

Let's take those silly earthquake events for example. In the region of Grand Canaria alone, there have been over 10,000 tremors over the past 3 weeks alone...earthquakes happen all the friggin' time somewhere on the planet. Cherry picking some just because they fit some randomly modified graph (yes, the way he assembled it is 100% random because of smoothing) is beyond silly.

It's like taking a shotgun, firing it at a barn door, and then painting a bullseye around the area where you hit most...just before exclaiming "see, I'm an awesome marksman!"


Can't wait for January 2013 when we can all laugh about this nonsense...not just the ones using critical thinking.



new topics

top topics



 
575
<< 168  169  170    172  173  174 >>

log in

join