Rendlesham forest, "Ancient Aliens" episode 30.12.10 and binary numbers

reply to post by torsion


Your idea that FOURTH is SOURCE is interesting but requires FAR to many bits to be modified.
01000110 01001111 01010101 01010010 01010100 01001000 = FOURTH
01010011 01001111 01010101 01010010 01000011 01000101 = SOURCE

From the scans you can see that the only two characters in question are the O which is only 1bit different from N. and possibly the U because there is an extra bit(a "1") in the beginning of the set.

There are no other characters in question.
So changing:
F to S requires 3 bits change from the original.
T to C requires 4 bits change.
H to E requires 3 bits change.

This same principle applies to changing CERP to FEAR.
At no time during decoding did i need to change more then 2 bits per character NOR did i need to re-arrange and of the characters or words.

reply to post by torsion


Interesting. Maybe the "fourth coordinate" (6668100) is really some kind of "code" for the gate to enter the bunker? But I didn't see any kind of keypad or combination lock on the bunker entrance. I assume that was taken by Google Streetview?

Does that appear to be a military installation or some kind of "regular" bunker a homeowner would have?

Originally posted by gmax111
In regards to the scans I believe the character values they have represented are roughly 90% accurate. However I am afraid that the remaining 10% will be difficult to correct as it is caused simply by human error. We can take stabs in the dark to correct the characters but I personally would only like to see 2 bits of data per character altered(AT MOST).

Hi gmax111,

Could you clarify your estimate of the error rate? Does your estimate of 90% refer to the level of errors in the transcription of the notebook numbers shown on the screen during the relevant episode of "Ancient Aliens" or (as I presume) to the level of errors in the notebook itself?

If the latter, doesn't a 10% level of inaccuracy mean that (assuming the same error level extends to the numbers that are asumed to represent co-ordinates) it likely that one or more of the digits in the co-ordinates is wrong?

Is your estimate of the error rate based on the number of changes to the binary code that are necessary to decode the code into intelligible letters/words?

All the best,

Isaac

Originally posted by gmax111
reply to post by torsion

 

but requires FAR to many bits to be modified.

How many is too many?

Given that this story is meant to be an alien craft in 1980 that travelled all that way(from wherever it came from), passing on a message in binary to an English speaking human I would argue any editing of the code is too much.

There is a high level of suspicion over this and rightly so, the first big step in getting answers comes when/if we are given the whole binary code as in its original state until then it seems there can be no way forward.

reply to post by IsaacKoi



Yes im referring to the notebook itself.

And yes assuming the scenario is turth, then we are forced to assume that the coordinates could be just as in-accurate. If the case is not truth than we can assume the coordinates are correct seeing as the main motive of the message is to guide users to those coordinates. The most sensitive part of the message would be the coordinates and i would assume he would go the extra step to make sure they are correct.

However from a pure decoding stand point page #2 containing the coordinates was the page with the least amount of errors.
Its pretty much the only page that doesnt require any manipulation such as adding or removing 0's or 1's. But it is also the only page we would not be able to "curve fit" because we can not guess at the outcome.
On the pages where there are words, we can change 0's to 1's and 1's to 0's in order to create the character that matched the context.
Such as changing EXPLORATIONOGHUMANITY to EXPLORATIONOFHUMANITY.
We are able to turn the G into an F just by modifying the very last bit of the 8 bit string that creates these characters.

To answer your last question: As for my level of accuracy, this is based on the DATA from the scaned pages as a whole. Some bits needed to be changed from 0's to 1's(and vise versa) in order to curve fit the data to the context. Some bits needed to be added to finish the character, but more often then not, bits needed to be removed. Sometimes it was as if he was repeating the data he just wrote. Almost like he lost track and just went back a few bits. eg. 01001011 "011" 01010101 - the quoted bits didnt fit and they are just repeated from the previous character. If they are used they usually made a character that does not exist in ACSII and also throws off the rest of the data. You can see this on the bottom line of page #2 where there is a "?" mark. He repeated the last 3 digits from the "I" and if these digits are used it throws off the bits to create the "N"

But none of this "modifying" was really needed for page #2. I have already thought about the possibility of the coordinates being wrong and had a look around on google maps. The problem is we are unable to use logic to predict the outcome of the coordinates so therefor it become hard to justify changing lets say a 5 into a 4.

Originally posted by JustCurious1

How many is too many?

Well assuming that we are able to fix the errors of text that fits to the context such as as changing EXPLORATION"OG"HUMANITY to EXPLORATION"OF"HUMANITY, We never had to change more then 2 bits. In that example it only required 1 bit of change. 0100 0111 to 0100 0110 (G to F).

So therefor we can assume the threshold becomes 2 bits. We can assume that the more we go over this threshold the more the user is just trying to create what he wants to see(data is corrupt). Now of course we can break this threshold if we are just fixing 1 character in a word that only has 1 outcome. Such as making ADVANC to ADVANCE. (In this case we went well over the threshold because the data to create the E simply does not exist in the written pages.) BUT we should not change whole words into other words as there is not enough error to justify that much change.

Data analysis is my specialty, im only trying to keep this logical. I hope this helped.

The information on the earth files link is interesting.

Q: HOW FAR IN THE PAST DO THEY GO?

A: These ships can go forty or fifty thousand years.

Q: WHY DO THEY COME BACK SO FAR?

A: So it doesn't affect the timeline. The farther it is the better, the least effect it has on changing the future...

Is there anyway to verify his regression? That it actually took place in 1994? If so it would bring into doubt that this is a recent idea of theirs to earn some cash. This just seems a bit too good to be true. Too much like one of the Stargate story Arcs.

How embarrassing are you people? Your trying to decode what exactly? You really think that this "code" which sat in the mind of a bogus witness for thirty years is REAL? This guy has added to his alleged encounter with every telling of his story. A life altering event happens and he somehow left the most important part out until now?? Wow I got some ocean property in Illinois I would like to sell you.


I AM SO EMBARRASSED FOR ALL OF YOU.

reply to post by gmax111


It does help thank you for taking the time to reply, I only know a little about binary & computer related code so the information is appreciated thank you.


To add to the discussion, has anyone thought what if the aliens are no more reliable than we are & even through their best efforts to encode a message from their language to English through binary it would be littered with errors.

So the possibility becomes if he recalled every 1 & 0 correctly and in order, the original message was incorrect & instead of human editing of the code being a problem it is in fact the solution.

Originally posted by deltamist
You really think that this "code" which sat in the mind of a bogus witness for thirty years is REAL?

Some participants in this thread appear to think so, some participants in this thread appear to think not.

Most participants appear to agree that this is a reasonably interesting development in the long-running saga of the Rendlesham incident.

If the story behind the binary code is genuine, then it is (of course) rather interesting...

If the document is a relatively recent fabrication, then this would be a serious blow to the credibility of one or two of the key witnesses in the Rendlesham story (and also undermine the credibility of one or two influential researchers that have supported those witnesses).

On either basis, it seems to me to be worthwhile testing the (currently limited) available evidence and seeking to obtain more (at least while I'm still on vacation - i.e. about another 12 hours...).

Do you have any proof either way?

All the best,

Isaac

Originally posted by deltamist
How embarrassing are you people? Your trying to decode what exactly? You really think that this "code" which sat in the mind of a bogus witness for thirty years is REAL? This guy has added to his alleged encounter with every telling of his story. A life altering event happens and he somehow left the most important part out until now?? Wow I got some ocean property in Illinois I would like to sell you.

edit on 3-1-2011 by deltamist because: (no reason given)

I dont see how anything is embarrassing. Either it is true or it is not. So 2 outcomes and 50/50. By decoding the message we are not trying to prove if it is true or false we are just trying to understand the message. Curiosity if you will.

How embarrassing are you assuming you know the answer? Stating it as if it were fact. Im glad u have your opinion but it does not give you the right to judge anyone else.

Originally posted by gmax111
reply to post by torsion

 

Your idea that FOURTH is SOURCE is interesting but requires FAR to many bits to be modified.
01000110 01001111 01010101 01010010 01010100 01001000 = FOURTH
01010011 01001111 01010101 01010010 01000011 01000101 = SOURCE

From the scans you can see that the only two characters in question are the O which is only 1bit different from N. and possibly the U because there is an extra bit(a "1") in the beginning of the set.

There are no other characters in question.
So changing:
F to S requires 3 bits change from the original.
T to C requires 4 bits change.
H to E requires 3 bits change.

This same principle applies to changing CERP to FEAR.
At no time during decoding did i need to change more then 2 bits per character NOR did i need to re-arrange and of the characters or words.

I understand what you are saying but relying on straight decoding of the binary doesn't give us a proper message. "ADVANC FOURTH COODINATE CONTINUOUS CEPR BEFORE" makes no grammatical sense and has three partial words and one non-existent word. So we have to move things around and apply a few changes to further "crack the code".

I'll stick with "COORDINATE CONTINUOUS FEAR BEFORE PLANETARY ADVANCE FOR EXPLOITATION OF HUMANITY FOR FOOD SOURCE" until a better sentence structure is proposed. And any way, if we start getting eaten we can blame Penniston for not alerting us earlier!

Originally posted by torsion

Originally posted by gmax111
reply to post by torsion

 

Your idea that FOURTH is SOURCE is interesting but requires FAR to many bits to be modified.
01000110 01001111 01010101 01010010 01010100 01001000 = FOURTH
01010011 01001111 01010101 01010010 01000011 01000101 = SOURCE

From the scans you can see that the only two characters in question are the O which is only 1bit different from N. and possibly the U because there is an extra bit(a "1") in the beginning of the set.

There are no other characters in question.
So changing:
F to S requires 3 bits change from the original.
T to C requires 4 bits change.
H to E requires 3 bits change.

This same principle applies to changing CERP to FEAR.
At no time during decoding did i need to change more then 2 bits per character NOR did i need to re-arrange and of the characters or words.

I understand what you are saying but relying on straight decoding of the binary doesn't give us a proper message. "ADVANC FOURTH COODINATE CONTINUOUS CEPR BEFORE" makes no grammatical sense and has three partial words and one non-existent word. So we have to move things around and apply a few changes to further "crack the code".

I'll stick with "COORDINATE CONTINUOUS FEAR BEFORE PLANETARY ADVANCE FOR EXPLOITATION OF HUMANITY FOR FOOD SOURCE" until a better sentence structure is proposed. And any way, if we start getting eaten we can blame Penniston for not alerting us earlier!

edit on 3-1-2011 by torsion because: pressed wrong button!

Humanity as a food source doesn't correspond terribly well with his hypnotic regression episodes though. Somethings not right, and I am tempted to believe the hypnotic regression over anything else, although I am remaining extremely skeptical.

reply to post by torsion

reply to post by torsion


Maybe you need to review the thread. Decoding in the order it was written you get this:




Its not really a message more like a statement.

More in this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by gmax111


Its not really a message more like a statement.

But as it stands it is neither a message or a statement. It makes no sense. The "unclears", like CEPR, need to be fixed as does the 8100. As there is no further data available speculation must apply to aid in the construction of a meaningful string of words.

With regard to the show, yes, it is often one-sided and heavily weighted. But entertaining nonetheless! Moreover, I have found numerous leads for further research on the show, and I think that's the best way to use the program: entertainment and new found resources, such as authors (Wilcock, Cremo), places of interest (like Nazca), etc.

I haven't seen the correlation on here yet between binary and music, specifically MIDI (musical instrument digital interface). That's how I first came across the code. It's quite different from anything I had ever used before but, after a while, I got the hang of it.

reply to post by torsion

I'll stick with "COORDINATE CONTINUOUS FEAR BEFORE PLANETARY ADVANCE FOR EXPLOITATION OF HUMANITY FOR FOOD SOURCE" until a better sentence structure is proposed.

If this code interpreted in reverse, maybe the message could read:
[sic] ADVANCED PLANETARY UFO [found at GPS coordinates] TO USE FOR HUMANITY EXPLORATION.

What if there is really an "Advanced" UFO, just waiting for humans to locate and use to explore planets that is really located underwater somewhere?!?

Also, the "FOURTH COORDINATE" reference in the code may refer to the fourth dimension, which is "Space-Time". It seems the first three dimensions - or GPS coordinates have already been given just prior, why not infer the "fourth" coordinate snippet be the fourth dimension.

Strikingly enough, Space-Time is indeed continuous.

Time traveling robotic craft observing and guiding the "flock" for human-planetary advancement?

It seems like maybe our futuristic ancestors may have some serious problems on their hands in the distant future, and the ONLY way to correct their situation is by slightly altering the past or shall I say our PRESENT.

Originally posted by deltamist
How embarrassing are you people? Your trying to decode what exactly? You really think that this "code" which sat in the mind of a bogus witness for thirty years is REAL? This guy has added to his alleged encounter with every telling of his story. A life altering event happens and he somehow left the most important part out until now?? Wow I got some ocean property in Illinois I would like to sell you.

edit on 3-1-2011 by deltamist because: (no reason given)

I AM SO EMBARRASSED FOR ALL OF YOU.

edit on 3-1-2011 by deltamist because: (no reason given)

lol

you are clearly never thought about the guy's perspective

he works with guns, in the army ... if he started talking about message from aliens, binary numbers, he would not only get fired, but maybe institutionalized

so, open your mind and think more about the guy's perspective, and not about you

Originally posted by Apollo1988
Is there anyway to verify his regression? That it actually took place in 1994? If so it would bring into doubt that this is a recent idea of theirs to earn some cash.

Hi Apollo1988,

I mentioned above that there are extracts from the videotapes of the regression in the SciFi Declassified documentary on Rendlesham, first broadcast on 12 December 2003.

Google Video Link

The regression footage appears at 1 hour 16 minutes onwards.

That documentary claims that this was the first time footage of the regression was broadcast.

However, there seems to be no doubt that the regression took place years earlier.

An article on the Wayback Machine's cache of the Omni website from 1997 contains an article (with a copyright dated 1996 at the bottom of the page) that refers to the regression in some detail. See:
HERE

All the best,

Isaac