Hyper Dimensional Design

Blue Mountain · May 8, 2009

Dutch said:
Because its different. You have never seen like this HDDesign before.

You're correct when you say we've never seen anything literally like HDD before. But we have seen astrology and numerology, soothsayers and gypsy fortune tellers before. To us, even a cursory examination of HDD is sufficient to show us it's not much removed from those attempts at understanding our world and making predictions about the immediate future.

And yet its so powerful and easy, based on basic harmonics in our solarsystems and basic platonic solid geometry

When you have to use minor news events to fill in an otherwise empty phi point on a timeline, while major events are not represented at all (except possibly after the fact), we conclude that it's not powerful at all.

It explains why synchronicities occur at a specific moment in our perceptive of time, and ultimately what these 'expressions' really mean.

I know for sure, that what HDDesign has been showing may not be understood or most possibly be dismissed by most, but that eventually the dedicated observer will understand the signifigance of it, that he or she will start to understand that our reality is indeed based on a Hyper Dimensionally Initiated Design.

One important conclusion science has made is that our brains are pattern matching machines. We're actually pretty good at it. So good, in fact, that we strive to find patterns in random data where there are no patterns at all. That's why a good scientist does not rely on intuition or even synchronicities when he (or she) is analyzing data. We're way too easily fooled.

Intuition gets us only so far. I'm thinking that in Europe it worked only into the 1500s. Only when Europe divorced its academic institutions from the Church (whose intellectual basis was the Bible, which in turn was based on bronze-age intuitions) did science come in and we began to make headway into resolving technological and medical problems. And even political problems: once we decided kings did not rule by divine right (which I might argue is an intuitive concept), we began building the robust democratic societies we enjoy today.

Jenny McCarthy's "mommy instincts" tell her it was a vaccination that caused her son's autism, so she's now campaigning against vaccines. Science tells us that was not the case, and that vaccines have saved millions of lives over the past 150 years.

Our modern world did not come about because we looked at things intuitively. Relativity is not intuitive. Quantum mechanics are not intuitive. Our rigid 3D view of reality (4D in the case of relativity) has served us extremely well.

Paul · May 8, 2009

Dutch said:
So?

So why should HDD be any different from all the other great universal answers?

HDDEsign is different.

How?

Its from THESE times.

Everything is from the time it is from; you might as well say 'this post is from now, it has nothing to do with the old posts from yesterday.'

It enables us to understand the correlations between synchronicities and puts events in our reality into perspective.

You still appear to misunderstand the meaning of synchronicity: for a start a synchronicity requires at least two simultaneous events without causal connection. That means they must happen at the same time, not years apart, and there must not be a connection between their causes. The absolute requirement of a lack of causal relationship means you cannot have more than one designed event, even if they are simultaneous, in a synchronicity.

Paul · May 8, 2009

Dutch said:
Because its different. You have never seen like this HDDesign before. And yet its so powerful and easy, based on basic harmonics in our solarsystems and basic platonic solid geometry

Again, if it's all so easy, show us your method and the easy maths you use to calculate the secrets of the universe.

Blue Mountain · May 8, 2009

Paul said:
Again, if it's all so easy, show us your method and the easy maths you use to calculate the secrets of the universe.

With respect, Paul, he has shown us his math. Or at least his computations. Over and over, usually in the wall-of-text posts most to which most of us of just say "tl;dr;lf" (lf="logical fallacies").

You're quite right to ask him for his method. We've seen lots of examples of it, but when we press him for a logical step by step explanation he has an annoying habit of saying, "I'm too busy to post that! Go read my forums!"

Problem is, his forums are nothing more than the wall-of-text posts he puts here (it's where he gets most of his stuff from.) That's like trying to teach computer programming by simply presenting completed programs to the students, or saying you're running a cooking school when all you're doing is giving the students breads and cakes, and the occasional list of ingredients.

No wonder the BAUT forum turfed him after seven months. The rules are more generous here.

Dutch · May 8, 2009

Blue..

I have nothing against science, its a good think to make progress.

But I think that science alone is not enough to understand the reality we live in, at least science from a limited 3D perspective.

Our current scientific understanding and proven facts about our reality, doesn't rule out the existence of a multi- dimensional reality and the possibility that consciousness itself is part of this. And that we can identify the pressence of such existence indirectly in our reality by intelligent correlations.

I fact the current state of scientific research needs additional dimensions in order to try to explain the reality we live in. We are still waiting on a scientific Grand Theory of Everything, aren't we?

So what would you do when that day comes and science proves that there MUST be other dimensions than the ones our rigid mindset is able to perceive. And that interaction is plausible if not the very base of our limited 3D reality? Are you going to think about the implications after science is giving you the green light?

The irony is that some or most people think that I'm wasting my time with this HDDesign 'research' , while I'm sure it will turn out to be a goog 'tool' in order to understand reality.

To me these 'coincidences' and synchronicities are indicating that there's indeed much more than the rigid 3D perspective of reality that most of us are desperately nourishing.

This HDDesign is giving you an opportunity to work with. Personal efforts are needed. Give these synchronicities a change and look at it with an open mind without loosing your sceptic rational mind.

Think rationally about these 'coincidences' and be honest to yourself.

Dutch · May 8, 2009

You're quite right to ask him for his method. We've seen lots of examples of it, but when we press him for a logical step by step explanation he has an annoying habit of saying, "I'm too busy to post that! Go read my forums!"

because there's nothing more than posted! I post 'realtime' in a sense that when these synchronicities occur, I log them in the material. and give the logical calculation. Its all there but you have to read it

Problem is, his forums are nothing more than the wall-of-text posts he puts here (it's where he gets most of his stuff from.) That's like trying to teach computer programming by simply presenting completed programs to the students, or saying you're running a cooking school when all you're doing is giving the students breads and cakes, and the occasional list of ingredients.

Yes the HDDesign material is the 'raw material' , I basically post stuff here from the timelines and try to identify future keydates and themes.

No wonder the BAUT forum turfed him after seven months. The rules are more generous here.

They changed the forum rules because it became pretty much clear that nobody was able to debunk this material. Its a shame.

They banned me just before these expected 'Srebrenica issues' happened back in June 2007, as posted and expected on BAUT forum.

AWPrime · May 8, 2009

Dutch said:
But I think that science alone is not enough to understand the reality we live in, at least science from a limited 3D perspective.

That would be a strawman, as even string theory requires 10+ Dimensions in their calculations.

the possibility that consciousness itself is part of this. And that we can identify the pressence of such existence indirectly in our reality by intelligent correlations.

Have yet to see 'intelligent' correlations.

The irony is that some or most people think that I'm wasting my time with this HDDesign 'research' , while I'm sure it will turn out to be a goog 'tool' in order to understand reality.

There is no method, its nothing more then a personal sock poppet.

This HDDesign is giving you an opportunity to work with. Personal efforts are needed. Give these synchronicities a change and look at it with an open mind without loosing your sceptic rational mind.

Think rationally about these 'coincidences' and be honest to yourself.

Now that is a double standard. You have shown no bit of honesty or rationality.

Paul · May 8, 2009

Blue Mountain said:
With respect, Paul, he has shown us his math. Or at least his computations. Over and over, usually in the wall-of-text posts most to which most of us of just say "tl;dr;lf" (lf="logical fallacies").

You're quite correct, I guess what I mean is that I'd be very interested to see what simple maths he uses to bring 'harmonics', geometry, orbital mechanics and higher dimensions together in one easy package.

I'm pretty sure there'd be some guys in Sweden interested in that kind of mathematical revolution as well.

Paulhoff · May 8, 2009

Dutch said:
I have nothing against science, its a good think to make progress.

But I think that science alone is not enough to understand the reality we live in, at least science from a limited 3D perspective.

You seem, like many, not to understand what science is really about. Here is a quote from Richard Feynman.

"“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”

Paul

Dutch · May 8, 2009

I totally agree

Blue Mountain · May 9, 2009

Dutch said:
Blue Mountain said:

A question for Dutch and anyone else reading this thread:

What is the difference between the incomprehensible stuff I posted in #1764 and what Daffyd is complaining about here?

(I have an answer, but I'll let others answer first.)

Click to expand...

Now we are talking,

Your stuff isn't marked by these High Impact events on a Phi line, unveiling the hidden message that is being given

Dutch, that answer was so far off what I was looking for that it isn't even wrong

The difference is that stuff I posted actually has a use. Well, perhaps not those carefully selected bits (I chose them because taken out of context they made no sense at all to people unfamiliar with them), but as a whole the awk programming language and regular expressions (a language used in computer science for finding matching patterns in text) are useful.

awk and gawk are used every day by thousands of Unix system administrators to solve problams and analyze data. Regular expressions are used every day by hundreds of thousands of programmers the world over to simplify the task of determining if sequences of letter and numbers ("strings" in computer jargon) match certain patterns.

Why are they used? First, because they work. For certain inputs, they produce predictable and reliable results. And second, because they are documented. Not only did the people who invented regular expressions and awk create something useful (which you have not), they also carefully documented what was required to replicate their results (which you manifestly fail to do, because you think it's not necessary.)

Blue Mountain · May 9, 2009

Dutch said:
Blue..

I have nothing against science, its a good think to make progress.

But I think that science alone is not enough to understand the reality we live in, at least science from a limited 3D perspective.

Yet you are utterly unable to demonstrate that you understand anything beyond a 2D perspective (simple plane geometry.) That's why we tune you out when you start babbling about our "limited 3D perspective".

Our current scientific understanding and proven facts about our reality, doesn't rule out the existence of a multi- dimensional reality and the possibility that consciousness itself is part of this. And that we can identify the pressence of such existence indirectly in our reality by intelligent correlations.

Science also cannot disprove that there is a teapot in orbit around the sun between the Earth and Mars. Yet I know of no scientist who believes that such a teapot exists. Why is that?

I fact the current state of scientific research needs additional dimensions in order to try to explain the reality we live in. We are still waiting on a scientific Grand Theory of Everything, aren't we?

So what would you do when that day comes and science proves that there MUST be other dimensions than the ones our rigid mindset is able to perceive. And that interaction is plausible if not the very base of our limited 3D reality? Are you going to think about the implications after science is giving you the green light?

The publication of a grand theory of everything would in no way vindicate anything you are posting here. For example, it would not include anything about hyperdimensional platonic solids with intersect points that influence events on Earth.

The irony is that some or most people think that I'm wasting my time with this HDDesign 'research' , while I'm sure it will turn out to be a goog 'tool' in order to understand reality.

To me these 'coincidences' and synchronicities are indicating that there's indeed much more than the rigid 3D perspective of reality that most of us are desperately nourishing.

To me, the irony is that you completely fail to realize that HDD is nothing more than your personal pet project, because you steadfastly refuse to listen to anyone who sees the all too obvious flaws in it--the very same thing you accuse us of when we reject HDD.

This HDDesign is giving you an opportunity to work with. Personal efforts are needed. Give these synchronicities a change and look at it with an open mind without loosing your sceptic rational mind.

Think rationally about these 'coincidences' and be honest to yourself.

"Think rationally"? Of all the stupid things you could say on this forum ... rational thinking is the process that led me and Paul and Paulhoff and a whole host of others to reject your scatterbrained ideas.

Blue Mountain · May 9, 2009

Dutch said:
because there's nothing more than posted! I post 'realtime' in a sense that when these synchronicities occur, I log them in the material. and give the logical calculation. Its all there but you have to read it

There is nothing logical to HDD. If there was, you'd be able to codify it into a set of principles and methods that others could apply.

<snip>
They [the BAUT forum] changed the forum rules because it became pretty much clear that nobody was able to debunk this material. Its a shame.

That is a lie. They manifestly did not change the forum rules. You were asked to do the same thing there that we're doing here: show your work, explain your methods.

Serenitude on the BAUT forum said:
I am going to take the middle ground and close this thread.

Dutch was not the OP. However, Dutch has voluntarily come to defend the merits of his ATM idea. In 1170 posts, it has failed completely wrt science and the scientific method. This thread has been going in circles for approx. 1150 posts, and the frustration levels are rising.

Dutch claims lack of time, but has found ample opportunity to post here. He also demonstrates no lack of time on his own board.

Permalink to the above post

However, I don't know why your account was banned. Perhaps they don't like people who can do nothing but beat the same drum all day.

They banned me just before these expected 'Srebrenica issues' happened back in June 2007, as posted and expected on BAUT forum.

They were expected in very much the same way we can expect winter to follow summer.

Dutch · May 9, 2009

for those who can read Dutch or know how to use a translator:

za 09 mei 2009
Jomanda niet bij rechtszaak wegens 'zorgen'
UTRECHT - Jomanda komt maandag niet naar de zitting waar zij terechtstaat in de zaak van de in 2001 overleden actrice en presentatrice Sylvia Millecam. „Het tijdstip baart cliënte zorgen”, maakte haar advocaat Luc Benistant zaterdag bekend.
De advocaat stelt dat Jomanda geen angst voor de zitting heeft en bereid is op een andere datum te verschijnen.
Waarschuwing
Volgens hem zei ze Pim Fortuyn twee weken voor zijn dood een bodyguard te nemen en waarschuwde ze in de weken voor Koninginnedag in Apeldoorn dat er grote problemen op die dag waren te verwachten. „Op dit moment speelt in haar beleving een soortgelijk probleem komende week, waardoor zij zich niet in staat acht te komen.”
http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/3885117/__Jomanda_wist_van__Apeldoorn___.html?p=4,1

Dutch · May 9, 2009

The difference is that stuff I posted actually has a use. Well, perhaps not those carefully selected bits (I chose them because taken out of context they made no sense at all to people unfamiliar with them), but as a whole the awk programming language and regular expressions (a language used in computer science for finding matching patterns in text) are useful.

awk and gawk are used every day by thousands of Unix system administrators to solve problams and analyze data. Regular expressions are used every day by hundreds of thousands of programmers the world over to simplify the task of determining if sequences of letter and numbers ("strings" in computer jargon) match certain patterns.

Why are they used? First, because they work. For certain inputs, they produce predictable and reliable results. And second, because they are documented. Not only did the people who invented regular expressions and awk create something useful (which you have not), they also carefully documented what was required to replicate their results (which you manifestly fail to do, because you think it's not necessary.)

and your point is?

I only notice those that come to me by synchronicity

Dutch · May 9, 2009

Yet you are utterly unable to demonstrate that you understand anything beyond a 2D perspective (simple plane geometry.) That's why we tune you out when you start babbling about our "limited 3D perspective".

really?

Dutch · May 9, 2009

Science also cannot disprove that there is a teapot in orbit around the sun between the Earth and Mars. Yet I know of no scientist who believes that such a teapot exists. Why is that?

A teapot is not a fat boy

Dutch · May 9, 2009

The publication of a grand theory of everything would in no way vindicate anything you are posting here. For example, it would not include anything about hyperdimensional platonic solids with intersect points that influence events on Earth.

First: I have never said influencing ( only 'reflecting')

second: If you can prove this right, you should be on your way to Oslo

Dutch · May 9, 2009

To me, the irony is that you completely fail to realize that HDD is nothing more than your personal pet project, because you steadfastly refuse to listen to anyone who sees the all too obvious flaws in it--the very same thing you accuse us of when we reject HDD.

I have yet to see the first clever remark that proves this HDDesign wrong

The synchronicities speak for themselves, you just lack to recognize it with your ego based rigid perspective of reality. Not meant as an insult, just an observation.

Dutch · May 9, 2009

"Think rationally"? Of all the stupid things you could say on this forum ... rational thinking is the process that led me and Paul and Paulhoff and a whole host of others to reject your scatterbrained ideas.

Do you really think comparing yourself with Paul and Paulhoff is giving you a stronger case?

Hyper Dimensional Design

Resident Skeptical Hobbit

Illuminator

Illuminator

Resident Skeptical Hobbit

Master Poster

Master Poster

Master Poster

Illuminator

You can't expect perfection.

Master Poster

Resident Skeptical Hobbit

Resident Skeptical Hobbit

Resident Skeptical Hobbit

Master Poster

Master Poster

Master Poster

Master Poster

Master Poster

Master Poster

Master Poster

Share this page

ISF - Join now!