Timewave Zero - Countdown to Transition

Sorry but i have to ask something stupid. What are the differences, on timewave calculator (the java edition) with king wen-kelley, king wen-watkins, king wen-sheliak, huang ti, franklin, cause all of them give different results.
In plain words, is someone more accurate than the others?

reply to post by Dimitrios


I don't think that one is more accurate than the other. I know that one is preferred because that is the one that Terrence McKenna used. I think that the difference between them lies in the formula that is used to make the graph.

reply to post by Evasius


A number of threads are springing into action about the crystal skulls, (due to one being put on display). Apparently there are 13 of them (number sound familiar Evasius?) and apparently it would be in our best interests to collect them all before 2012.

I still have a lot of reading ahead of me since I really don't know much about them yet, but I was wondering if TM has ever mentioned these skulls or if they tie in with TWZ in any way since the history behind them seems to point to the same zero date?

Originally posted by misfitoy
reply to post by Evasius

 

A number of threads are springing into action about the crystal skulls, (due to one being put on display). Apparently there are 13 of them (number sound familiar Evasius?) and apparently it would be in our best interests to collect them all before 2012.

I still have a lot of reading ahead of me since I really don't know much about them yet, but I was wondering if TM has ever mentioned these skulls or if they tie in with TWZ in any way since the history behind them seems to point to the same zero date?

Those crystal skulls are all fakes.

I saw it on TV

reply to post by DangerDeath


That's what my son and I thought we heard awhile back as well, but didn't know what to think when the subject is dug back up.

It seems to be the theme these days... 'everything will have controversy' lol.
Thanks for your response.

also just noticed that it's mainly one person bringing these threads into action, so in the words of SNL.... "nevermind" (although some of the stories behind these are pretty fun to read when they have coincidences to twz).


[edit on 27-6-2009 by misfitoy]

reply to post by zenius


October 2011 is a popular timeframe for predictions of catastrophe, though I don't have any information yet regarding resonances, past cycles, and what might happen during that month.

Some of you may remember the now banned member 'D4rk Kn1ght' and his infamous prediction for October 28, 2011 (which coincides with the John Calleman end date). Here are the 2 threads:

A confession. Guilt makes me post this.

28-10-2011

It sounds similar to what the OP of that other post is saying...anyway like I said I don't yet have any info supporting or opposing the claim. Here's the graph of that time:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7ad8b8df0bfa.jpg[/atsimg]

That month's graph is all over the place with major shifts occurring every few days. The lowest point on that graph is October 5, 2011 which is the lowest point on our entire timeline until mid-year 2012. It is interesting to see that massive dip that sags over the entire year - it could in fact mark an important milestone for us. What it represents is unknown.

I was just looking back at an image that Evasius posted earlier in the thread, which had a graph of the timewave up until June 30th. From the looks of it, the next low point happens at just before 7am on the 29th of June, which is Monday.

My question is, is this 7am UT or for a specific timezone? Also, does that fact that we have very little time to get back into "habit" stem from this timewave being a compressed one from earlier in history?

I came across John Sheliak's 49-page paper making corrections to the timewave this morning and skimmed it through so far, and after reading it so far I'm convinced we should be using the Sheliak number set.

It's the same curve (70% the same) just slightly different in different areas, he provides historical comparisons to the standard timewave graph vs. his revised timewave to provide proof as well, all math equations is documented as well. Compares to Watkins equations as well.

Paper available from his site:
Sheliak_Formalization.pdf

Originally posted by dviper785
I came across John Sheliak's 49-page paper making corrections to the timewave this morning and skimmed it through so far, and after reading it so far I'm convinced we should be using the Sheliak number set.

It's the same curve (70% the same) just slightly different in different areas, he provides historical comparisons to the standard timewave graph vs. his revised timewave to provide proof as well, all math equations is documented as well. Compares to Watkins equations as well.

Paper available from his site:
Sheliak_Formalization.pdf

Thanks for that find. I'm reading it with interest.

McKenna himself found the Sheliak version/revision to be the most mathematically sound. It is documented on this site: timewave2012.com...

I use the Java version on the same site: timewave2012.com...

The default version is Sheliak, but you can click the box beside other versions to see how they compare.

reply to post by dviper785


Unfortunately, when I see mathematics that complicated I get sleepy....very sleepy. I'll take his word for it...

reply to post by Evasius


I remember reading that first thread of D4rk Kn1ght's, but didn't know about the second one. Thanks for posting it. It makes for an interesting read... a bit of a trip to say the least.

He mentions on the first page a 'pre-event occurrence' happening in 2009, so I guess we will see soon enough if he actually knew anything.

reply to post by misfitoy


When I read his prediction for march 2009 as a date for some big event I stopped reading. Get one thing wrong and you are not a prophet.

reply to post by John Matrix


Maybe I read it wrong (it's been a while since I read the first thread), but I thought he said he was 'leaving' in March, not that things would happen then.

There's just too much info out there, isn't there? I enjoy just reading stuff and then see how things pan out over time. If something proves itself to be wrong, then yea it's time to move on.

Originally posted by Szerablyn
Hello everyone I'm new here, I would like to share thoughts with all of you in a good way, hoping to discover the ultimate truth

I've been reading ATS since August 2008, almost a year. I've followed the Timewave Zero theory along with the web bot, while I dont trust the web bot since many times it has been inaccurate and completely doom and gloom, I do believe in the Timewave Zero...

Just some hours ago it came to my mind a theory, I'm not sure if it could be considered good, anyway I would like to share it:

Since currently the timewave zero period we're passing through is 1789-1800's, what if Michael Jackson's dead is a resonance to the dead of the king of France? I mean, I have been listening the whole day how they say "the king of pop has died" , and appareantly it has been shocking news in most of the world.

What do you think?

[edit on 26-6-2009 by Szerablyn]

[edit on 26-6-2009 by Szerablyn]

[edit on 26-6-2009 by Szerablyn]

I was just thinking that! The coincidence is very strange...I can't wait to see if anything happens on June 30th.

Forgive me if these questions have been asked and answered.

With that said, I find this theory interesting and thought provoking, regardless of its validity. My question is about the "Zero Point." As far as I can discern, Terrence McKenna arrived at the "Zero Point" based on assumptions, correlations of the Mayan long count calendar, and the calculation of 67.39 years after the Hiroshima nuclear offensive (putting the date around mid- November of 2012). So then, if the "Zero Point" is incorrect, then are all other "correlations" incorrect? Additionally, why is the "Zero Point" assumed correct? It would seem from all the information that I have read on the matter that this theory would be better refined with a more analytical and logical approach to determining "Zero Point."

Unfortunately there seems to be a flaw in the initial reasoning concerning the identification of this zero date. Prior to 1990 McKenna had always stated that the zero date was 2012-12-22, not the date of 2012-12-21 which is now often used as the zero date. The approach he originally took to determining the zero date was to look for an event of great novelty in recent history, and to take this as the start of the final 67.29-year (24,576-day) cycle. The use of a uranium bomb to kill 80,000 civilians on 1945-08-06 seemed to him the most likely candidate for such an event. Adding 67.29 years to the date of the incineration of Hiroshima brings one to mid-November 2012. Influenced by the fact that the current 13-baktun cycle of the Maya Calendar ends in December 2012 McKenna adopted 2012-12-22 as the zero date.

As I said, I do find the theory itself rather creative and logical. In addition, the mathematics involved appear well established and postulated. We are only beginning to understand the universe that we live in. It would be very unsurprising if this theory, or a derivation, one day carries more weight in mainstream thought. Thank you OP for this interesting discussion, and I look forward to your comments and critiques.



Sources:

www.hermetic.ch...

en.wikipedia.org...

EDIT: Spelling Error

[edit on 27-6-2009 by Two Eight Seven Four]

reply to post by Evasius


Thank you Evasius. October will be an interesting time indeed. Could you please tell me what years this correlates too when you have a chance please?

reply to post by Two Eight Seven Four


The zero point as indicated by McKenna seems to be a rough estimate based on his mathematical "delvings" so to speak. He happens to indicate 2012 as the zero-point because of how he projected the mathematics from a single date that he determined. Thus, it is only a guess I think and only as accurate as the McKenna equation, itself.

The mathematical equation developed by McKenna is, indeed, very inventive and clever. But how accurate it is, that is probably open to some interpretation. Remember, the wiggly line in the software only represents what McKenna called "Novelty".. AND that is a pretty broad way of putting things.

Does it represent human emotions, economic turmoil, good times, bad times, etc..? How McKenna explained it is that it represents everything at at once. It is not so much an indicator of the human condition as it is an indicator of the timewave, itself (or at least the timewave as humans percieve it). That is important to remember here.

The timewave as displayed in the software at any one moment in the future is only an indicator of what the timewave is doing with relation to the universe (at least that's the idea). It is not exactly an indicator of great depressions, rioting, or armed conflict (although it is believed based on previous observations that human activites on earth do directly influence the nature of the timewave). This could mean that we are all directly linked as one and are all projecting the timewave ourselves. Or it could just mean that we are the timewave altogether. Alot of theories, alot of really open possibilities here to consider.

There are really no differences between the equation developed by McKenna in support of Novelty Theory and what we see in the software. Some people have constantly come forward claiming that the mathematics involved are slightly off from what they should be, thus, they aregue that the zero point date as predicted by Mckenna is also wrong. But it is important to remember that it is a rough estimate, regardless of who claims to have the true numbers/dates/etc.. (Or at least a rough estimate using McKenna's equation).

It is also important to note that all of this is directly related to "Novelty Theory".. The term "Theory" being key here. Thus, anyone claiming to have the correct numbers and dates are only making claims that cannot directly be proven until those times and dates come into the present on the timeline. We probably won't really know whether or not the zero point really exists until it actually happens.. Let alone when such an already misunderstood event might really happen.

Personally, I don't really take McKenna's word for all this, but it does make alot of sense. Therefore, IMO, McKenna is probably somewhat correct.. Just how correct, we have to really decide that for ourselves.
For me, Evasius's efforts on ATS are more intruiging than anything else because this really gives you alot of perspective about how time might truly operate with relation to the universe.

We're just now discovering that there is nothing that is truly random in the universe. Even the most random functions in nature all conform to very real, very simple mathematic equations. Everything in our uniform seems to do so.. Why wouldn't time? And if we could determine how the equations really operate that determine such random events, wouldn't we be able to accurately predict what would happen in the future? Alot of how we determine this is how the mathematics are applied, and alot of mathematicians operate differently because they all think very differently from one another.

We are only now starting to understand things like the zero point field, supersymmetry, quantum entanglement, etc..
But they all seem to have some basis in reality.. And I know that quantum entanglement has already been scientifically proven in the laboratory (which, if people paid attention to science these days such a discovery would blow everyone's socks off).

But all this ties in together to form the true picture of our universe as we observe and experience it. Time is just one piece of the puzzle but it does seem to follow very price mathematical equations/functions just like gravity, electromagnetism, everything down to atomic nuclei and how crickets creek at night. If people only say "Novelty theory is just an equation".. You could argue.. "So was E=MC squared". Everything in the universe can be expressed through mathematics. Alot of people just don't get that.

-ChriS

TWZ is related to the equinox precession as I demonstrated here:


the dots are the change of ages. Additionally you can see the similarity of certain ages (eg Libra).


I have created a complete presentation about this that you can find here:
www.ordosolis.org...

this is actually in italian but i think it is easy to get the sense. Especially slide 58 ++ are relevant for this discussion.

586 Million year Geological Cycle and Galactic Supercluster Walls

Came across this video accidentally, I find the graph in the end very interesting.

www.youtube.com...




Also check out the whole series www.youtube.com...


[edit on 28/6/2009 by rocksolidbrain]