September of '08 -- Just Listen.

reply to post by realshanti


You are doing a good job in trying to explain the theory in this thread. I think that many people (most people) just look at the graph and think that the line represents good and bad, not novelty and habit. A time of novelty doesn't necessarily have to be a catastrophy, it just has to be different than the norm.

Hell, if anything... a change for the good would be pretty damn novel these days. Perhaps we will begin our withdrawal from Iraq or perhaps come to an agreement with Iran. Both would qualify as a novel change to our normal behaviour of war and profiteering.

Good thread OP, I have been wondering if anyone on here is actually using this software. I am a little dissappointed by the posters who just ridicule the topic without even looking into it. I guess I can understand though. On the surface, this looks like another nutjob doomsday thread, but it is a lot more than that and it may not be doomsday at all.

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
Jon Benet Ramsey
And?

If it wasn't for the media's over exposure of this story, it wouldn't even be considered serious.

Children are murdered more than we like to believe. I fail to see why this one was any more tragic than the rest. Simply because the media decided to cover this one does not make it any worse.

And simply because the media covered it doesn't mean it had world wide or even country wide implications. Based on the events you are choosing to point out to justify this, it would seem to indicate that you believe this murder did have some sort of implication.

You are obviously unaware of the conspiracy surrounding JonBenet Ramsey that has tremendous implications as to what's going on around America, and the world. In this thread I tried to bring these issues to light. The thread withered and died, nobody cares that she was a satanic ritual sacrifice. Nobody cares that everybody got off scot-free. It was recently confirmed in the MSM that the father was cleared of any wrongdoing. Fine and dandy, isn't it? All's well that ends well. People really are sheep.

[edit on 21-7-2008 by RiotComing]

Originally posted by re22666
why do people here take theories and cling to them wholeheartedly as if they "know" the facts that so far no one can actually prove?

Maybe for the same reason other people take dead horses and beat the holy crap out of them hoping to make themselves look clever.


Edit to add; To MysticMushroom, I dont know if you read the post a few pages back where the poster gave instructions on taking screen shots, any chance you could take one of the graph and post it so we could get a look at it without the reflection from the light on the screen? That would really be great if you could.




[edit on 21-7-2008 by Illusionsaregrander]

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
Now, I finally have mathematical proof that "something" will happen about/around that time.

If my prediction based on the mathematics of this is wrong -- I'll have egg all over my damn face and take it gladly.

I believe the math is correct --

You make several assertions that your conclusions are based on math but after reading the Wiki article it clearly states that the theory is based on numerology. Big difference.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

any chance you could take one of the graph and post it so we could get a look at it without the reflection from the light on the screen?

I thought the issue was that he was running it in DOS and that is is why he can't use the "print screen" feature.

I could be mistaken though.

reply to post by Karlhungis


Oh. I did notice he mentioned DOS, but I didnt realize that would affect the print screen capability. I came after DOS, and havent ever had to use it. Thank you for clarifying it.

Originally posted by TheComte

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
Now, I finally have mathematical proof that "something" will happen about/around that time.

If my prediction based on the mathematics of this is wrong -- I'll have egg all over my damn face and take it gladly.

I believe the math is correct --

You make several assertions that your conclusions are based on math but after reading the Wiki article it clearly states that the theory is based on numerology. Big difference.

You are only half right - here's the wiki definition:

Novelty theory attempts to calculate the ebb and flow of novelty in the universe as an inherent quality of time. It is an idea conceived of and discussed at length by Terence McKenna from the early 1970s until his death in the year 2000. Novelty theory involves ontology, morphogenesis, and eschatology. Novelty, in this context, can be thought of as newness, density of complexification, and dynamic change as opposed to static habituation. According to McKenna, when "novelty" is graphed over time, a fractal waveform known as timewave zero or simply the timewave results. The graph shows at what times, but never at what locations, novelty is increasing or decreasing.

And then here:

The timewave itself is a combination of numerology and mathematics. It is formed out of McKenna's interpretation and analysis of numerical patterns in the King Wen sequence of the I Ching (the ancient Chinese Book of Changes). This concept first took root in his entheogenic experiences shared by him and his brother Dennis McKenna as documented in the book True Hallucinations. The theory is clearly[1] based in numerology and takes shape out of McKenna's belief that the sequence is artificially arranged as such purposefully. Mathematically, the sequence is graphed according to a set of mathematical ratios, and displays a fractal nature as well as resonances[2] although it was not captured in a true formula until criticism from mathematician Matthew Watkins (see below). McKenna interpreted the fractal nature and resonances of the wave, as well as his theory of the I Ching's artificial arrangement, to show that the events of any given time are recursively related to the events of other times.

en.wikipedia.org...

Because it was partially based in numerology and not peer reviewed (though Terrence invited mathematicians to take it apart but they largely ignored him) it was not accepted by the established scientific community...there does exist one criticism of his theory which I think if I remember correctly, Terrence was very appreciative of...as he wanted people to take the idea and improve on it....

When it comes to time and remembering the past or even looking into the future, it is wise to reflect upon these words written many years ago by a wise king...

The thing that hath been, it [is that] which shall be; and that which is done [is] that which shall be done: and [there is] no new [thing] under the sun.

Is there [any] thing whereof it may be said, See, this [is] new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.

[There is] no remembrance of former [things]; neither shall there be [any] remembrance of [things] that are to come with [those] that shall come after.

History repeats, we had the crash of 29 it had all the signs as we are seeing today, it is just that the stock market hasn't collapsed yet.

This is something in this theory that I dont understand.
Why is Zero poit set on 2012? Why not in year 3600 for example?
What happen if we move this zero point horizon event?

I still believe that is a math tricky game, and you can allways build a method/theory that can fit all possible future events, but read on past.

reply to post by realshanti


Oh, I would say I was more than half right. Plus, it's based on the numerical sequence of the I Ching. This is not a mathematics.

As the theory was never published in a peer-reviewed journal and McKenna's sources and reasoning were primarily what would be considered numerological rather than mathematical by professional mathematicians and scientists...

That's not to say I don't find it interesting. I don't believe it, but it's interesting.

[edit on 21-7-2008 by TheComte]

Mystic Mushroom


I stumbled on this thread last night when I was too tired to reply, and have been thinking about it even since....it completely fascinates me and I can see how it works, basically...but I have some questions forming in my head...I will trail through all the pages and rubbishy posts again to get to what's really important, and thank you for putting all your ideas here to read....I feel in my guts it's correct, and want to know more. I will be back later....with questions...and advance apologies if they're silly.

Starred and flagged, btw...

Cait

I ask all the trolls and 'debunkers' to please carefully read this post. I'll try and re-explain some concepts that will (hopefully) put an end to the 'why-jon-benet-and-no-9/11 posts'.

• Please look into the Global Consciousness Project. Explain why the results of that are not statistically random. Yes, it relates to timewave.
  
  
• The I Ching has lasted for thousands of years. It is based upon some deeper universal 'current' and is not random. The ordering of the hexagrams is by intent. Is it remotely possible that the I Ching was created to represent something we simply don't understand and that its creator(s) were somehow more in-touch with certain concepts of the universe?
  
  
• Timewave measures the non-uniform oscillation between status-quo and change (for an overly simplistic explanation). The course of humanity tends to move in a certain direction at any given time. Then, something will happen that changes that direction and causes us to move in a different direction (novelty).
  
  
• What is the important event? The one we see or the event that initiated the change to begin with?

An example: You're living you life as you always have with its never ending stream of ups and downs. But largely the same routine over time. Then you get married. That will certainly cause a change in your life's direction and routine.

Now, from timewave's point-of-view, what was the tipping-point to novelty(change)? Your wedding day (the big, visible event) or the day you first met your spouse (the event that set everything in motion)? Timewave would choose the latter because THAT is what triggered the change.

So let's look at 9/11 (for example). Unquestionably a HUGE event (the big, visible event). But timewave would look for the event(s) that set that catastrophe in motion. Because as important as 9/11 is in the universal timeline what was really important and what changed the course of history was the event(s), decision(s) that set those events into motion.

If you think about timewave as less of a specifc event 'predictor' and more of a 'course of events' predictor it will make far more sense. But that, of course, requires you to have an open-mind. But again, if you insist on maintaining that timewave cannot possibly be real I ask you to explain away the Global Consciousness Project and its related research .

here's my timeline prediction. Well its my prediction for a stock market crash beginning on or around 18th August 2008:

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Futureview
This is something in this theory that I dont understand.
Why is Zero poit set on 2012? Why not in year 3600 for example?
What happen if we move this zero point horizon event?

I still believe that is a math tricky game, and you can allways build a method/theory that can fit all possible future events, but read on past.

Please, please: I've said it only 2 times before in this thread: McKenna was not aware of the Mayan 2012 calendar thing until (years) after he came up with this theory.

McKenna had to connect it a certain amount of novelty to our timeline, that's true.

He has connected the whole thing to the atom bomb:

"McKenna chose Hiroshima (the first use of an atomic bomb against a civilian population) for his 'exceptionally novel' event. After some adjustment (described above), a zero date of 2012-12-21 was settled upon."

www.hermetic.ch...

Originally posted by jtma508

So let's look at 9/11 (for example). Unquestionably a HUGE event (the big, visible event). But timewave would look for the event(s) that set that catastrophe in motion. Because as important as 9/11 is in the universal timeline what was really important and what changed the course of history was the event(s), decision(s) that set those events into motion.

I was thinking along the same lines. (Which is why I was hoping to see a more closeup view of the graph) I think the trigger event *should* be the one at the endpoint of a habit phase. I would like to see what, (roughly) these trigger points or events correspond to. If anything.

As you point out, the real novel event may be nothing more than a thought, a decision. Some shift in Awareness. It may not be a physical occurrence at all. (Particularly if changes in the Awareness really DO create the physical world/manifestation) It may well be that we could correlate all know physical events and never see the complete picture if it is changes in Consiousness itself that triggers or corresponds to the trigger points. That is much harder to quantify, because we dont know if it begins with the first person who has the shift in consciousness, or when some "tipping point" in the global consciousness is achieved. It would be fun to play with though.

So....thinking loud here...maybe the 2012 date is all about a massive and total collective shift in consciousness....not death and destruction at all as some people fear, although I have other intensely personal reasons for knowing destruction isn't facing us...maybe the 2012 date is about us knowing who we are, where we came from and how to use our consciousness fully to live happily, create, travel, heal, communicate....maybe....an intense moment of realisation that we all experience that will change how we live and co-habit the earth....



Cait

I read through this whole thread and all the data for the graph and time wave info, and it's interesting. However, it's completely non-sensical and without merit, IMO. First of all, any sort of attempt at prophecy has no credibility unless it can point to specific event and a specific time and place. Something bad will happen somewhere in the world at some point in the future, and there will probably be bad or even terrible events for the future of humanity, along with great and amazing events. It's just a mathematical certainty that they will happen. That's just how life works. There is no way to pinpoint when they will happen or where they will happen, calculations like the OP's offer nothing substantive.
There are dozens if not hundreds of threads predicting bad things on ATS, and sometimes they are going to be right just because of the shear volume of information on the web. I just can't get behind anything or anyone that just happens to have a "bad feeling" about a certain place. Give me something concrete, then we can accurately measure and record it...that's how science is supposed to work. Offering vague predictions based on weirdly esoteric data just doesn't fulfill my requirement for proof of anything.

Originally posted by caitlinfae
So....thinking loud here...maybe the 2012 date is all about a massive and total collective shift in consciousness....not death and destruction at all as some people fear, although I have other intensely personal reasons for knowing destruction isn't facing us...maybe the 2012 date is about us knowing who we are, where we came from and how to use our consciousness fully to live happily, create, travel, heal, communicate....maybe....an intense moment of realisation that we all experience that will change how we live and co-habit the earth....



Cait

Exactly!

There are stories which see 2012 from the perspective of ascension/rapture like perspective.

reply to post by caitlinfae


One thing I have been considering, is that it may be the end of Time. Time is a mental construct. In terms of consciousness, we are always in the Now, the present, as Eckhart Tolle and many more ancient teachers have pointed out. Perhaps the "end date" merely means the concept of time will cease for us. That would explain, if the graph shows the fluctuation of Awareness of Consciousness over time and space why the graph would just end. You would collapse into the singularity, as someone else phrased it. Who knows what that would look like physically? It might not look like anything different at all, as one would assume that all events and all possibilities would be contained in that point.

Dont tear the crap out of me due to my terminology, please. This is a very brief post, just intended to convey the general idea I am having and I am trying to use the terms that are popular, not my own best word choices. (which dont always translate well on this forum)

reply to post by White Chapel


Well, to be fair, the way science works is someone has a vague (or even a very clear and insightful) idea. Sometimes this idea precedes what most call proof by centuries.

If we closed our minds to all the ideas that are currently unprovable, science would stop dead in its tracks.

What you are calling science in porn would be called the "money shot." It is nice to be able to apply the scientific method immediately to these ideas, but sometimes it takes technology a while to catch up to the visionary and allow us to do so. (Which is why we build things like the LHC for example)

Dont forget also that in science a lot of what we "know" scientifically later turns out to be just flat wrong as we develop technology that allows us to see a previously invisible cause that underlied something that later turns out to be merely a correlated thing.