It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 66
<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 08:47 AM
Just my two cents - after reading all the previous posts here;

Why does no body mention that when McKenna was quizzed about the mathematics/system behind "timewave zero", he could not or would not answer them? Nor the fact that he came up with this idea when he was trippin' hardcore and was given the idea by Aliens. . .

I gave a link, pages back, that broke down his theory (by a mathematician) and picked it to pieces. This idea of "novelty" or whatever it's called - i cannot remember - is an incredibly obtuse variable with no actual discernible value. What are the valued representatives of said "novelty" - what properties does it govern itself by and how is it measured/acted out - What are the methods by which you can break down this "Novelty" into a mathematical sentence?? . . none. It's fluff.

When people who were not as easily fooled asked this same question to McKenna himself, he had no answer or flat out refused to answer. That's only one incredibly HUGE aspect of why this is wrong.

That brings me to the point of; if this ENTIRE system is fundamentally based upon a variable by which has absolutely no meaning or answer - a "false" data point if you will, then how can anything else be relied upon as fact? What about the FACT that he changed the end date of TW0 to better fit the other prophecies that were going around at the time?

Again, this was to peak interest in "Terrence McKenna" and to get people to listen, buy books etc. It's ALWAYS about money. So when people see this "zero point" in the graph, they wonder what will happen.. Well why don't we all buy his books and DVD's on the matter to better educate ourselves? hmm??

The End date was modified by McKenna also (wiki TW0, it tells you on the page), it was not originally 2012 - it was a year or so later. But i suppose he was making more than just the date fit - he was forcing data to fit a model and structuring a computer program around all of the above.

Btw - I have noticed there are obvious oversights by people wanting to view this as some kind of guide. For one, When some "bad" things happen, the graph is on an incline? and when other "bad" things happen, the graph is on a decline - where is the logic in this? Am i to believe that the graph interprets human stance on matters? Impossible as point of view is biased and different to every individual on the earth.

This makes no sense, as it seems the graph is heavily biased (giving the benefit of the doubt here, that there may actually be some relevance to reality in this idea) towards one view of an event over another.

Also, why are people looking at the dates that a certain change occurs in this graph and then "googling" to see what happened on that day? Seriously, BAD THINGS happen every day - not to mention things of notability occur every other day. Though a plane full of Westerners crashing might be considered "bad" from our side of the fence, i'm sure there are people with other beliefs that would see this as a positive occurrence.

Or is TW0 just a view of the events from a certain defined perspective. Apparently, No. This thing tried to talk about affects on the whole HUMAN RACE. So how can some things, i.e. death, be considered "positive" in one instance, then in another instance with similar events occurring, be considered "negative".

This whole program wreaks of rubbish.

If Climate Gate showed us anything, it's that computers can undoubtedly/obviously/purposefully be made to give a desired end result, not truly reflective of the data being input.

Sorry to the true believers out there - but after having researched this to the fullest, it's just as bad as the "substantiated" claims of Zacharia Sitchin and his kin.

Like i said, just my two cents.

posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 09:05 AM
reply to post by FeralMonkeyMagic

You have obviously not read into this well enough or misunderstood the concept.

This graph is not keeping track of "Good" or "Bad" ,but the "Rate of Novelty"

Novelty meaning "Change to something new"

It gives us good insights into new discoveries and people learning of big events.

Usually when the wave goes down on the graphs in this thread ,Novelty increases.

The graphs could be flipped upside down ,its a matter of preference.

Its based off the ICHING which is called the long count. Its very old.

I just advice you to read the thread or ask Evasius if you want to know more.

[edit on 28/1/2010 by Mystic Technician]

posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 09:16 AM

Originally posted by Mystic Technician
reply to post by FeralMonkeyMagic

You have obviously not read into this well enough or misunderstood the concept.

This graph is not keeping track of "Good" or "Bad" ,but the "Rate of Novelty"

Novelty meaning "Change to something new"

It gives us good insights into new discoveries and people learning of big events.

Usually when the wave goes down on the graphs in this thread ,Novelty increases.

The graphs could be flipped upside down ,its a matter of preference.

Hallucinogens + Alien communique + inability to fully explain mathematical equation = fallacy.

Good luck with your predictions.

Nuff Said - there's a good reason why stuff like this stays in forums like these.

Because the program and mathematics behind it does not stand up to any scrutiny what so ever.


p.s. I have read this thread - and none of this is believable or logical.

A simple Wiki Search shows that this has been debunked by many astronomers, mathematicians and other scientists in any field that this program attempts to touch on.

I quote:

"Timewave zero" is a numerological formula that purports to calculate the ebb and flow of "novelty", defined as increase in the universe's interconnectedness, or organised complexity,[55] over time. According to Terence McKenna, who conceived the idea over several years in the early-mid 1970s while using psilocybin mushrooms and '___', the universe has a teleological attractor at the end of time that increases interconnectedness, eventually reaching a singularity of infinite complexity in 2012, at which point anything and everything imaginable will occur instantaneously."

Funnily enough, this "novel" idea of Terrences is lodged firmly in the 2012 Doomsday portion of Wiki.

Another qoute

"The algorithm has also been extrapolated to be a model for future events. McKenna admitted to the expectation of a "singularity of novelty", and that he and his colleagues projected into the future to find when this singularity (runaway "newness" or extropy) could occur. Millenarians give more credence to Novelty theory as a way to predict the future (especially regarding 2012) than McKenna himself. The graph of extropy had many enormous fluctuations over the last 25,000 years, but it hits an asymptote in the middle of November, 2012. After his discovery of other doomsday theories that would take place on exactly December 21, 2012, he simply bumped up the date of "doomsday".[21] This statement is contested, however, by McKenna's own mouth when during a lecture he said,"

Enough has been said about this on my behalf. You know my standpoint - no point in arguing with you about yours/mine.

Just thought this thread needed some balance.

[edit on 28-1-2010 by FeralMonkeyMagic]

posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 10:33 AM
What about the actual measurable changes that occur on a daily basis. Expedentially undeniable, vibrationally painful, visually apparent, audibly evident. I am not a 17 year old newbie, but well educated and at least 2x older than a 17 year old. The quickening is certainly evident. Fools are those to not prepare.

posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 10:48 AM
reply to post by FeralMonkeyMagic

He was given the impetus to look into the thing by the Mushroom voice.
How does his trippin' hardcore in any way diminish the truths he may have uncovered?
And just like the I CHING,TWZ seems to work well.

posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 10:53 AM
reply to post by FeralMonkeyMagic

So thank you for your contribution to this thread.I'm kinda curious,do you give any credence to the I CHING?That one may learn truth by tossing coins?Is the King Wen an accident?

posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 11:00 AM
This thread is getting pathetic. Which shouldn't be surprising for a 2012 thread!

I Ching? I don't think so, more like. There is no evidence it is anything other than baseless mysticism.

posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 11:09 AM
is this a 2012 thread? well /....

To disregard the I ching philosphy is pure and utter ignorance.

This is not my fight so why did I pipe? Because the ignorant will suffer in the waking and unless they understand and accept ignorance is bliss, in their case, the struggle will eat them, consume them and like a mythological vampire, the wise and understanding will pity and attempt to help them in vain. Hope is not a given, freedom is not a right, death is certain.

posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 06:36 PM
Do i give any value to the I-Ching? Perhaps, though it is a system on it's own - though it's mystic in it's origin.

Do i believe that "shrooms" give an insight into truth? No - i believe that hallucinogens give people hallucinations - Vivid ones at that, which are controlled by their imagination and subconscious.

Ignore the fact that he cannot and did not care to explain the other variables in his formula that he used to make this program? These are huge fundamentals which structure the basis on which TW0 "works".

Ignore the fact that he changed the date deliberately to make it fit to what he wanted.. i.e. other 2012 ideas...

For those that believe hallucinogens do no damage, ignore the fact that McKenna died from overuse of these substances from subsequent damage of these chemicals being overused.

Ignore, Ignore, Ignore, Ignore ...

How much do you have to ignore to believe this has some reflection of what would happen in reality?

Ignore the fact that it is fallacy.

Just take what you want and ignore the rest of the overwhelming evidence that this is a fictional creation utilising 2 completely different functions which bare no correspondance to one another.

Then ignore the fact that the mathematics behind this does not fully function and ignore the fact he did not care to "enlighten" us all as the parametres by which "novelty" is ACTUALLY measured and mapped out in mathematics.

posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 10:16 PM
reply to post by FeralMonkeyMagic

Honestly I would love to debate your points... but suddenly I am reminded of how you tried refuting my points in another thread by citing a 'friend', with 'a degree in Anthropology', with no published material whatsoever, (a marvelous accomplishment to be awarded a certificate without ever making a log in his school's journal, wouldn't you agree?) who 'talked with experts' and came to the conclusion that Nibiru was a God. Never mind the fact that you're post was the first time I had ever even heard of such a notion.

But like I said, you bring up some valid points and I would like to debate you... but I just don't know if you're some kind of sophisticated troll or not. (no offense!) Sadly its not hard to come to this kind of a conclusion lately here on ATS.

[edit on 1/28/2010 by Tgautier13]

posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 04:48 PM
I highly doubt that you have heard McKenna's take on psychedelics in order to come up with that conclusion.
you also have to keep in mind that it is the bad reputation of the word "drugs" given to the mushrooms that make them a sort of edgy subject to talk about.

I guess here comes the tipping point. If you find his "stoned ape theory" to be feasible, then the whole idea change of conscious/evolution of humanity seem to be related to the mushrooms.
This idea that diet might have been the key in the change of evolutionary process, rather than "random bursts of cosmic radiation changing the DNA"

At least the idea of diet and adaptation has a solid base ground than the "randomness" most scientists seem to believe in.
(similar goes to the big bang theory that universe appeared "randomly" from a singularity)

There comes ignorance in your assumptions as well then. I guess you have to try the mushrooms to know it?

posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 05:04 PM
LOL, look at these trolls trying to derail this thread.

claiming that because he did use such things as mushrooms and '___' to expand his thinking process, that he is completely false or misguided.

Clearly, whoever claims that has never been under the influence of such substances.

However you can assume whatever your ignorant mind likes. doesn't discredit Mckenna nor the many others who have used mind altering substances to help them figure out answers.

take a look into how the double helix theory of DNA was discovered,
wasn't by some guy tripping on acid or anything......

people are so narrow-minded stubborn and plain ignorant it's almost sickening,

the point here is that something is happening, and you can block it out for as long as you like, but there's more to life, than working and getting money.

posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 06:41 PM
reply to post by FeralMonkeyMagic

Throwing around some fact free slanders,are we?
Modern science still can't tell you where your thought process REALLY happens.
They're PRACTICING medicine.How can you explain the Shaman's intimate knowledge of the flora and fauna?They eat the plants of knowledge you so deride.They claim that is key.Beats Transubstantiation in my book as it requires no faith or ginuflecting.Once you're on the path,there is no stopping it,you are there on the edge and no doubt.It's not disordered thought process,poisoned by toadstools.It's coherent and has a voice.
And what about old King Wen?

posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 06:47 PM
reply to post by davesidious

How many million I CHING using Chinese and Westerners just dismissed like that?
They are merely deluded?All that time?All those decisions?Baseless?
Only a one with an agenda would say that.

Christians?They seem to have the hardest time with it.

posted on Feb, 1 2010 @ 01:43 PM
O.k look, in my younger days i experimented with magic mushrooms and i tell you this; What i saw cannot be expressed in words, and it was not hallucinations. Humans are normally only tuned in to the material frequency, the chemicals in the mushrooms stimulate receptors to be receptive to other frequencies, or realms, or dimensions. All i can say is you would not believe the reality behind the creation! Everyone is shrouded in the illusion. This world were in is not really how it is after all.
I'm hoping that when our solar system conjuncts with the galactic equator in 2012, that it "switches on" the receptors in our brains(the pineal gland)
and everyone will see the truth.

posted on Feb, 1 2010 @ 02:04 PM
This is for the feralmonkey chap and other similar sceptics.

Whilst I’m quite sceptical myself about the way the time wave has been expressed on here, in a very simplistic 2 dimensional and quite shallow presentation that doesn’t do justice to the nature of the universe as an unfolding multidimensional pattern of frequencies and resonances (basically an expanding object made of vibrating particles) it does describe a fundamental quality.

I'll use a couple of analogies (the time wave descriptions on here are also just analogies of the true nature of things so I hope these will explain a little)

Moores law, the complexity of micro chips increases exponentially over time and works towards an 'infinitely' fast computer, we may never achieve 'infinitely' fast, but we can see how and why this process works.

Standing on the shoulders of giants, we better ourselves with bigger and bigger jumps of scientific discovery and intuition based on what has gone before, sometimes the parallels (read resonances?) are unavoidable and even inevitable when we use the same language, whether that is English or Arabic or Maths.

We are part of an evolving and learning system (even if you just accept that as being the system of living organisms). Of course we will observe increases in complexity and pathways that enable us to survive or give us more options to evolve .

[edit on 1-2-2010 by Wobbly Anomaly]

posted on Feb, 3 2010 @ 02:30 PM
Just wanted to toss in to a post above; if you use Wikipedia as a reliable resource of information, you shouldn't even bother trying to explain things to other people. They don't accept Wikis as references in ANY official paper ANYWHERE. You can't even use them for a simple homework assignment in school.

This should tell you something.

posted on Feb, 3 2010 @ 07:27 PM

Originally posted by Demonis
Just wanted to toss in to a post above; if you use Wikipedia as a reliable resource of information, you shouldn't even bother trying to explain things to other people. They don't accept Wikis as references in ANY official paper ANYWHERE. You can't even use them for a simple homework assignment in school.

This should tell you something.

I am not sure what use of Wikipedia you were referencing as it has been used in a variety of different ways in this thread, so I decided to chime in.

While Wikipedia is not a reliable source for academic research, it is an excellent reference for learning the basics about a subject. Specifically, it is helpful for finding historical information. The only reason it is not acceptable for actual research is because information in it can be incorrect. You should never cite Wikipedia in a research paper.

BUT, say you are researching the Battle of Stalingrad for example, and you learn from Wikipedia that "The German 16th Panzer Division was shocked to find that, due to Soviet manpower shortages, it had been fighting female soldiers.". Well, there is a citation on Wikipedia for this tidbit of information which is the book Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege: 1942–1943 so you find that book, check it out, find where it speaks of the 16th Panzer and use that as the source for your research paper.

I guess what I am saying is that it is okay to use Wikipedia as a research tool but it is not okay to quote / cite information solely on Wikipedia as truth.

If I check a date next week in TWZ and it resonates back to August 1942 (just making this up), it is okay to use Wikipedia to find events that occurred in August 1942. It is not okay to use quotes from Wikipedia to support or negate the validity of a fringe theory like TWZ without reading and understanding the source of that information.

In short, Wikipedia usually is fine for getting an overview of a topic, is okay for checking historical fact, but not okay for analysis of a subject.

posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 04:31 PM
All this talk about Greece and some sorta melt down for tomorrow,I thought to look at the Wave on the old Mac.
So heads up friends and fellow TWZ Techhies,there is a steep uptic into Habit starting tomorrow.It's like the first of a pair,any Timewave will show it.Resonant to Dec 13,1829,not much found at a glance.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by trueforger]

posted on Feb, 14 2010 @ 05:38 AM
Here is a video from the director of District 9 talking about the coming singulaity (you have to watch the whole thing to get to the juicy bits though).

To me its an 'obvious' direction we must go and an excellent 'practical' description (rather than the mathematical ones that that TWZ deals with) of the speeding up of connectivity.

And if anyone knows how to get this embed feature to work.....i'm clueless !!

[edit on 14-2-2010 by Wobbly Anomaly]

top topics

<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in