(December 15, 2013 at 7:26 pm)insider432 Wrote: lets see if base 6 corresponds to singularity.

6 + any digit does NOT return the same digit

6+2 = 8 and NOT 2 = fail
6+6 = 12 = 3 and NOT 6 = fail
6+5 = 11 = 2 and not 5 = fail

Base 10:

9+2 = 11 = 2
9+6 = 15 = 6
9+5 = 14 = 5

it returns the same digit, 9 is invisible. 9 is everything and nothing at the same time...

Yep, your base 6 math is certainly a fail alright. Care to explain how you got an 8, a 12, or an 11 in Base six???

5+2 = 11 and IS = 2 = Pass
5+4 = 13 = 4 Pass
5+5 = 14 = 5 Pass

(December 15, 2013 at 7:53 pm)insider432 Wrote: Do you realize that you are actually saying that quantum physics is bogus and therefore meaningless? lol

I'm sure I said nothing of the sort.

Quote:if we encounter such patterns a few times in nature it can be labeled coincidence with no apparent meaning or significance. But if it keeps popping up everywhere we look (especially when it comes to sub atomic vibration which is the very basis of physical matter) then it starts to become evidence eventually. There's so much evidence out there supporting the 9 code that its actually ridiculous.

I'm not denying that there's a pattern in the mathematics. What I deny is that any of that implies intelligent creation. What you have completely failed to do in this thread is prove that assertion. I had a hard time digging through your mess of a post, but it doesn't even look like you really try to prove that assertion.

If it's not coincidence, prove it. Your number games mean nothing if you can't use any of it to prove that it is the result of intelligent creation.

(December 15, 2013 at 10:35 pm)insider432 Wrote: no worries i dont plan on sticking around for long, just got some time on my hands thats all.

Do us all a favour a fuck off early.

(December 15, 2013 at 10:16 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote:

(December 15, 2013 at 9:54 pm)insider432 Wrote: no, he's a fraud...and faker

---

yea you are definitely a liar..i know enough about you to know that...

So could you please cite, I did watch the videos and all they have is more numerology, and your argument agianst other number system is unconvincing to say the least, as it seeems to me the argument is simply because they don't show the oddites with the number nine or the flower of life. I would argue that you claim base 6 numbering totally useeless by saying it doesn't correspond to reality. Here another thing too, how did this "creator" know we would have 10 fingers? Because I'm sure you know that thats the only reason we have a base 10 system. If we had six fingers we'd teach base six in elementary.

Those videos are no different than what quantum physics does, its the same as saying quantum mechanics is unconvincing...understand that the CUBE (flower of life) is the primary building block. You cannot apply base 6 to the cube (flower of life) polarity is missing. and the doubling circuit only works with base 10. Your computer memory and graphics card memory for instance uses the same doubling circuit as presented in video nr.3.

even our screen resolutions are based on the 3 6 9 matrix. In other words you cannot create a terahedron with base 6. And as presented earlier single molecules are shaped like a terahedron:

Click the link: IBM takes closest shot yet of single molecule. Hexagram and hexagon shape in your face which is the cube.

https://www.google.de/#q=ibm+takes+close...e+molecule

---

(December 15, 2013 at 10:36 pm)Brakeman Wrote:

(December 15, 2013 at 7:26 pm)insider432 Wrote: lets see if base 6 corresponds to singularity.

6 + any digit does NOT return the same digit

6+2 = 8 and NOT 2 = fail
6+6 = 12 = 3 and NOT 6 = fail
6+5 = 11 = 2 and not 5 = fail

Base 10:

9+2 = 11 = 2
9+6 = 15 = 6
9+5 = 14 = 5

it returns the same digit, 9 is invisible. 9 is everything and nothing at the same time...

Yep, your base 6 math is certainly a fail alright. Care to explain how you got an 8, a 12, or an 11 in Base six???

5+2 = 11 and IS = 2 = Pass
5+4 = 13 = 4 Pass
5+5 = 14 = 5 Pass

no it doesnt work...polarity is missing and its all messed up...whatever

So, essentially, "my evolved ability for pattern recognition is so important and wonderful, and hence every pattern I see is necessarily some baked in feature of the universe."?

Forgive me if I don't find ad hoc number crunching to be terribly convincing, especially when it's paired with the superbly arrogant back patting that we tend to see in, oh yes, charlatans.

Got anything real, kid?

(December 15, 2013 at 10:41 pm)Ryantology Wrote:

(December 15, 2013 at 7:53 pm)insider432 Wrote: Do you realize that you are actually saying that quantum physics is bogus and therefore meaningless? lol

I'm sure I said nothing of the sort.

Quote:if we encounter such patterns a few times in nature it can be labeled coincidence with no apparent meaning or significance. But if it keeps popping up everywhere we look (especially when it comes to sub atomic vibration which is the very basis of physical matter) then it starts to become evidence eventually. There's so much evidence out there supporting the 9 code that its actually ridiculous.

I'm not denying that there's a pattern in the mathematics. What I deny is that any of that implies intelligent creation. What you have completely failed to do in this thread is prove that assertion. I had a hard time digging through your mess of a post, but it doesn't even look like you really try to prove that assertion.

If it's not coincidence, prove it. Your number games mean nothing if you can't use any of it to prove that it is the result of intelligent creation.

so basicly you are saying that complex patterns like that can arise by pure chance? How does the flow of energy know how to behave correctly? It must be either intelligent itself OR its being governed by some sort of intelligence. Dude this stuff just cannot happen by pure chance.

Just letting you know quantum mechanics does the very same thing, why dont you tell them to prove their number games when it comes to gravity and other models? Btw mainstream science got it all wrong when it comes to gravity. It's more of a pushing force than pulling force and yes you can laugh again if you want. But there's evidence for this.

Insider your knowledge is just too advanced for the world, go play hide and go fuck yourself for about, oh I dunno, 9 years. Maybe we'll be ready by then.

(December 15, 2013 at 11:01 pm)insider432 Wrote: so basicly you are saying that complex patterns like that can arise by pure chance?

Well, given that you aren't limiting your scope at all, when your boundary for finding those patterns is something as large as "the universe," then of course you're going to find commonalities in disparate points, because the universe is literally the totality of everything we've ever known!

Quote:How does the flow of energy know how to behave correctly? It must be either intelligent itself OR its being governed by some sort of intelligence. Dude this stuff just cannot happen by pure chance.

Baseless assertion= immediate dismissal. No.

(December 15, 2013 at 9:34 pm)insider432 Wrote: So what do you think this is? You going to label it coincidence? because everything in my initial post in undebunkable, all of it. So what is it in your opinion? Just weird coincidences? Really? Thats it and you'll forget about it just like that? It doesnt make you wanna dig deeper and do some research to see if there is something to it or not? you just going to dismiss it and pretend its not there? you seriously think there's nothing to it?

Yeah uh, just because someone says something is so, doesn't actually make it so.
The words that come out of your mouth are no more important than the poop that comes out the butt of a fly. Just because you say that something is "undebunkable," doesn't make it remotely true.


Who the FUCK are you? Nobody ... just some lunatic who likes numeric patterns a little too much and probably has an unhealthy love of jesus and his merry band of men.

(December 15, 2013 at 10:53 pm)insider432 Wrote: In other words you cannot create a terahedron with base 6. And as presented earlier single molecules are shaped like a terahedron:

no it doesnt work...polarity is missing and its all messed up...whatever

You can't create a tetrahedron with base six?? Ha Ha Ha HA HA!

You so funny! I guess in your base six world you can only count to five?

I wonder how a binary computer manages to make one??? Oh the mysteries of upper fifth grade math!

Polarity!! Woo hoo!! You don't even know what you are talking about..Not even a clue..