mooeypoo

Stop moving the goal post. Your numerical value theory is linked to the meanings -- the entire point is that the numbers go with the meaning, that's what the page is babbling on about, and why the specific words that give out specific meanings were CHOSEN to be shown to give specific numbers. If you want people to treat your theory seriously, you should be consistent. If the translation and the hebrew meaning doesn't matter, then the words don't matter either, and just like you chose ones that give 666 and 999, I can choose others that give me 333 and 777 -- the most POWERFUL combinations in the bible, or find other concepts with the same numbers you picked. Be consistent and stop throwing us around in games. I followed your logic, and switched the goal post with you three times already. I am not going to do that again. ~moo

I meant the specific choices were laughable, not the theory as a whole, in this remark. Again play with numbers. I found other meanings to the numbers (alien technology was an interesting one..) does that make it valid? not quite. Again, statistics are statistics, and play with number is the same game whether you're "skipping letters" or "counting values". Same same. It's not valid on its own, it needs - at the very least - further validation. Hence, supporting evidence. Finding supporting evidence inside the bible to support to theory inside the bible is circular logic, and is not valid either. Nitpicking what "works" is not valid theories. Ignoring what doesn't work is not valid theory. With due respect, my friend, you have ignored what I wrote as errors, specifically the mistranslated words (which, at the very least, casts doubt on the translation - and hence meaning - of the entire chapter). Depends on which book. The page I read was not the translated Genesis 1:1, it was a collection of random words from that chapter, and from other chapters ("Sun of god"?? where does that come from, exactly? not sure at all). It didn't even give the proper reference. If you are asking if Genesis is translated to english correctly, the answer is never yes and always 'sorta'. The bible is written in a vague language using vague words that can be interpreted in relation to context. King James bible is one of the worst translations of the original hebrew out there. I personally have an english/hebrew bible from (I think..) Jehova's wittnesses, and it's relatively okay. Anyone who has ever written anything and had to translate his work (literary or concise) to another language can understand this very well: A translation is *never* perfect, and is rarely good enough to convey true meaning of words. The biblical way of writing make it even worse, because not only does it use general-vagueness in the stories (analogies, etc) but also multi-meaning words. A word can mean different things in different contexts, and in the SAME context. I'll give an example: "Thou shall not sleep with man as with a woman, it is an abomination". I'm sure you know that verse from Leviticus 18:22. However, in hebrew, not only does it have a different meaning, it can have several: 1. Don't sleep with men, it's an abomination (deserving death) 2. Don't sleep with men on the bed of a woman (hence, sleeping with another guy is considered cheating as if you slept with another woman). 3. Don't sleep with men, it's naughty (say sorry and i'll forgive you) and a few more, probably. You see, that's the main problem about reading the bible -- it's VAGUE and open to interpretations. If it weren't so, there wouldn't be so many denominations in Christianity and Judaism. Everyone think they're the ones with clear understanding of the interpretation of the verses, but the bottom line is this: It's *all* interpretation. When you have a translator, he reads the text, interprets it, and translates the *interpretation*. You think God wrote the bible, and wanna know what God said or meant? Learn hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, and study how to analyze the texts. Anything other than that may be okay, but you need to understand that it's based on an already *interpreted* translation, and that the translator had a clear idea of what he thought this SHOULD mean. No translation is perfect. You're being unfair. Now it's okay to 'invent' words? If it is, then my "Alien Technology" finding, along with all the other bizzar ones, are valid as well. Be consistent. And Jesus may be that in Greek, but in HEBREW (his suppopsedly maiden language?) it's one of these: ישו = 316 (Yeshu) ישוע = 386 (Yeshua) ג'יזס = 80 (Literal pronounciation of 'Jesus') So that's what I meant by "nitpicking". If you want to have true meaning, hebrew should have been the one to go with - but you went with greek, which, technically, did not quite appear in relation to Jesus until his desciples, 70+ years later. But hebrew doesn't give the "nice" numbers, so you go on 'till you find the meaning you want. So sometimes the meaning is given in hebrew and it's "wow meaningful!" and sometimes when hebrew fails, it's not meaningful? you find it in greek, or latin, or aramaic, or yiddish, to make it meaningful. That's nitpicking through the evidence you *want* to have while ignoring negative evidence, and it's not science. I don't know if it is, because I never counted the letters. If you're after the eficacy of the chapter, though, I have about 100000000 things I can give you that completely 'screw it up' for the writer, like, for example, the fact that the order of creation appears twice in different orders, that man and women are first told to be created together and then one after the other, that there couldn't have been light before the sun, that there couldn't have been plants before the sun either, and many - maaaaany more. But we're not talking about that now, so I concentrated on teh STATISTICAL "evidence" of literacy in the bible -- what the OP is talking about. Same same. It's showing you how easy it is to find what you are looking for by using numbers, and that anyone can find different numerical games in different attempts according to what each wants to see in them. I think I showed you that with the "Alien Technology" and "Jesus/Joshua" numerical values, though, for some odd reason, you slightly ignored these. cheers, ~moo

.... what?? I.. don't quite get your point.. plus, stating that chaos theory states that a system can undergo drastic change at any time is a huge oversimplification, wouldn't you say?

Good movie, iNow, summarizing the issue quite well, I'd say. Well, Graviphoton.. I'm still waiting on a proper answer to my hard-worked-on answer, if not this video too. ~moo

For that to be absolutely true (if that is ever possible) you need to prove that "biological forms" are *not* machines. The more we study these forms, specifically the brain (though, granted, we don't know a lot about the brain, but that doesn't mean we can't ever know) we see it being true -- the human body specifically, and biological forms in general - seem to be very similar to machines. Very sophisticated machines, but machines nonetheless. On top of that, the more we study neurology, the more we find absolute connection between PHYSIOLOGY (hence, the brain physical reaction) to emotions, consciousness and though, which suggests that they are completely tied to the brain as a computational "part" of our body. For that matter, the more we unlock the "mystery" of the brain, the closer we get to 'human-like' machines. We made a lot of progress in AI in the last years. The fact we are not yet there does not mean we can NEVER be there.

oookay, I was just firmly corrected by my more intelligent peers. Apparantly matter cannot be created or destroyed is a *classical* property.. whatever that means. So, apparantly, matter and mass are dependantly perserved.. err.. Klaynos should explain this part, but my point is that I was wrong in that statement apparantly. We learn somethin new every day. ~moo

Actually, you cannot create or destroy MATTER too, by the laws of thermodynamics. It's not the "only thing" that you cannot create or destroy. I think I lost your point there, Farsight - are you saying a black hole is pure energy / made of only energy ?

...I didn't expect *that* reply... ~moo

Okay, let me make 3 points before I start with the hebrew-analysis of the text: I don't quite like the fact that I had to find the requested page on google; this opens up the option that I worked hard on something that will be "claimed" to be "not the right page". Google had many results to the query: the first 2 were forum posts between people, so I skipped them. I will be using THIS specific page: http://www.nick2211.yage.net/2701.htm which was the third result, and the first actual site. If it's nt the right one, Graviphoton, do the proper work and present the proper resources, please. Here are the letters of the hebrew alfabet, not including "end-letters", with their numerical gimatriya values: א Alef = 1 ב Bet = 2 ג Gimel = 3 ד Daled = 4 ה Heh = 5 ו Vav = 6 ז Zaiyn = 7 ח Khet = 8 ט Tet = 9 י Yud = 10 כ Caf = 20 ל Lamed = 30 מ Mem = 40 נ Noon = 50 ס Samech = 60 ע Ayin = 70 פ Peh = 80 צ Tzadi = 90 ק Kuf = 100 ר Resh = 200 ש Shin = 300 ת Taf = 400 Even if that page has all the math correctly, which will be examined in a second, that is by no means a proof of anything other than people playing with mathematics. With due respect, I can do the same with Harry Potter and find cool letters. I will look it up, but I used to have a link for a site that did exactly that. So graviphoton - you still have some work to do to convince me. This preliminary analysis is ONLY to confirm the hebrew/math/biblical occurances. The page jumps from one arbitrary conclusion to another which makes the final conclusion quite doubtful, to say the least. For instance, the number 2701 is many things along of it being a "Triangular Number", and the pick of specifically that 'property' is arbitrary. I'm sure that the math experts on the forum could have a field day with this number more than I can, and we can just as well pick another property arbitrarily that will show a completely different (and perhaps similarly convincing) conclusion. This quote: Shows the utter arbitrary'ism of the entire method. Frankly, it's laughable. I can promise you I can pick a different number, twist it back-to-font and place it on its side and get the result I'm aiming for too. Math games are simply that. Math GAMES. That said, here's my preliminary analysis: ------------------------------------------------------- Elohim is only equal 86 if it is written in "missing letter writing", which, granted, is the custom way the bible is written (though *not* exclusively). If you write the word in full text, it is equal to 92. The word "Ve'et" (mispronounced "Vath" in the text supplied) is not 203. It's 401. In fact, just a quickie -- there is absolutely no WAY that anything with the letter "Taf" (the sound 't') has anything under 400, since the letter itself has a value of 400 in gimatriya. Hebrew does have an alternative to "t" which is the letter "tet", which equals to 9 (no 200 there either) but it is rarely used at the end of words, and regardless, it will NOT give the value of 200+, since "Alef" is 1 ("Eh"/"Aa" sound) and Vav ("vvv" sound) is 6. Summarizing Genesis 1:1 בראשית - Bereshit = 913 ברא - Bara = 203 אלהים - Elohim = 86 את - Et = 401 השמים - Hashamayim = 395 ואת - Ve'et = 407 הארץ - Ha'aretzh = 296 ============================ Which makes the total = 2701 Which is the same as the page says it is, so I must assume their "203" result is a typo. Funny how no one calculated it before I don't quite get what the author wanted to show with the weird bolded letters on teh side of each number-word calculation, they make no sense and they are not literal pronounciations of the word... i didnt see an explanation for them either, but i might've missed it. Now, about the result 703, here are the words they're saying (I added the proper pronounciation unlike their very weird way of trying to pronounce.. the hebrew word is the same, though): אבן Stone (Eh-ven) = 53 (how the heck would they get to 703 is quite beyond me.. refer to the letter list above to see why) גן Garden (Gan) = 53 (same...) רזי יסודות Secret Foundations (Razei Yesodot) = 703 The 666 entries: -- I have no idea what "Sorat"/"Srt"/"surat"/"sarut"/any-other-mix means. I could not, therefore, find that word in HEBREW or its meaning. I don't know any words with similar sounds that mean "Spirit of the Sun".. if you know the actual hebrew word, please share. That said, SRTH (TH is usually "tet" and not "taf", but since i dont KNOW which one was meant, I will examine both options): Samech Resh Taf = 660 Samech Resh Tet = 269 (occasionally, "Shin" can have a sound "sss" instead of "sh"): Shin Resh Taf = 900 Shin Resh Tet = 509 The closes one seems to be the first. This "core-verb" (not sure how you define that in english, it is a core that on top of it you create similar-meaning verbs and some nouns) - can mean "Minister of" (female). "Sarat Milhama" -- Lord of war (female). It can also mean "to serve", but that comes with a "Sh" sound, which doesn't affect the calculation but DOES the meaning. שמש יהוה Shemesh Jehova = 666 (They don't give a resource for that, I have to tell you this isn't very widely used in the bible.. too bad they didn't give resources for contextual check. Finding arbitrary made-up terms that fit the numerical target is really not a proof of anything but an imaginative writer) אליהכם\אלוהיכם Elohikhem (that is the *only* way to say 'your god'. It *must* be with a Kaf, not a Koof -- check the list above -- unless they invented a word, or I missed something. If you think this should be corrected, give me the actual hebrew word) = 112 or 106 (depends if you write full or missing-letter style). שם יהושוע\יהושע Shem Yehoshua = 737 or 731 COMMENT: The site claims that "Hashem Yehoshuah" is "The name of Jesus". That is simply not true. The phrase "Hashem Yehoshuah" means one of A FEW meanings, depending on context: "Hashem" can mean GOD or 'The name of'. "Yehoshua" is either Joshua (and NOT jesus! Jesus is "Yeshu(a)", which isn't the same, and is not written or pronounced the same) or "Will help us". So it can mean - "God will save us" or "The name of Joshua". Joshua was a biblical prophet. It is *NOT* Jesus. - Here are more words + 'sentences' that fit 703 too (So what?) : My mother is naked (אמא שלי ערומה) I will kill you (אני אהרוג אותך) The contestants (המתחרים) Alien Technology (טכנולוגיה חוצנית) --> I think we're on to something here... Also Job 30:31 is summed to 703. 999 & 703 Bereshit + Elohim (AGAIN with the arbitrary pickin') == 999 or 1005 (The web page should REALLY get a hold of if it's using full-text or missing-letter-style..) Value for Pi I'm sorry, but I am NOT going to count the number of letters and the division of letters. I'll grant you that one, though I'd expect the holy bible to be more accurate than 5 digits. The rest of the page also speaks of some very weird mathematical manipulations to get to whatever they aimed at. It all seems VERY arbitrary and quite imaginative. I have no will, time or desire to count words in those chapters or to calculate the entire chapter's Gimatriya value, so I'm going to stop here. This was a very preliminary analysis, but it should give you some food for thought. And it was all I could do between exams. ~moo

Yeah, Graviphoton, I don't want to give youa partial answer -- but sadly, I am having a huuugemongous physics exam tomorrow evening. So.. sorry.. It's going to take me a while... just letting you know in advance - i didn't forget. ~moo

please.

I don't mean to disrepespect at all, you apparantly did a lot of work here - but I do have a request -- could you please write the hebrew words you were using for your calculations? If it wasn't clear by my other posts -- I actually speak Hebrew fluently, and I learned the bible (and Gimatria) for about 12 years in school. You already did the work -- just add the words, please. It will help me evaluate your claims better. Thanks, p.s -- this is in hebrew, but so is Gimatria in general, so just so you see what tools I'm going to use (I'm not going to calculate the thing on my own now.... no patience for that) -- http://www.gimatria.net/gimatria/ pretty cool tool -- you look up a Hebrew word, and it calculates the value and shows all the words that are equal in value from and out of the hebrew bible. If you care for an amusing example, apparently the word "אלוהים" - Elohim (God) - is equal to 92, and here are a few words that are also 92: אהם אהם - Ahem Ahem אמא אדמה - Mother Earth מזהם - Doing Pollution בכיין - Cry baby פחד - fear סחיטה - blackmail צב - turtle http://www.gimatria.net/gimatria/%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%94%D7%99%D7%9D/ (feel free to verify independently) ~moo

The word "Sky" has at least 3 or 4 alternative words I can think of in hebrew that are used in the bible. The usual meanings of words are not decided by literal translation (that is almost impossible most times, since that makes no sense), but rather by the context. A word can mean 'lucid' in one instance and 'see-through' in another. To correctly translate whatever word you mean, Graviphoton, you will have to give me the full biblical resource. ~moo Here: http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0201.htm *Decent* (though not perfect... i dont think it's possible to have a perfect) translation. Plus, there's hebrew on the side so if you have questions about a specific sentence, at least I can have a reference ~moo

I gave you a program that can find anything you want. What more do you want as proof? Try it yourself... there's even an english and a russian version. Have fun with it.

I can find any meaning I want in the bible this way, including "God is false". http://www.hofesh.org.il/religion_merchants/diloogim/ron.html Since the bible was originally written in hebrew, the above article is dealing with the hebrew original version. Let me translate the so-called codes: Figure (1) Genesis 19:10, skip 122: Moses' Tora ('knowledge'), Cheating, Akum ('gentile' - abbreviation), nonsense, evil All in the same skips, wonderfully next to one another. Figure (2) Genesis 21,22 skip 4036: [this one is refering to a very big rabbi in Israel called "Noigershal" who is famous in his attempts to shove religion in people's faces and convert them (try to, at least)]: Noigershal, Not a rabbi, Liar, Con artist, Philistine, Jail. Now, in hebrew each letter has a numerical representation (it's an OOOOLLLLDDDDDD 'theory'). And using these 'codes' you find words that have the same numerical value. However, that happens in *HEBREW* -- the ORIGINAL language of the bible -- not latin, and DEFINITELY not english. I suggest you go back and read history. So, another point for you: The bible wasn't written in English, it was written in Hebrew/Aramaic, translated to greek and latin, and *THEN* translated to all other languages. Your "code" in the english language makes no sense. Whether you use skip, code, or anything else, you are using the wrong language. And for all you code lovers, here's a program for you: http://exodus2006.com/torah4u.htm It's hebrew, yup, but at least it's the real bible. And you can find ANYTHING and EVERYTHING in there. I, for one, found "God is false" and "you are an idiot" and "joking". Nice ones, eh? ~moo

I completely agree. However, the only thing that strikes a nerve, for me at least, in this specific case, is the huge number of children, and the fact this was a sort of a "compound".. it seems to not quite be a "normal" house hold. But, as Phi and Cap'n pointed out - we can't conclude a lot yet, not until evidence are shown. I'm just expressing a reason for my own personal skepticism atm.. no particular evidence for it, yet. Just an opinion. ~moo p.s (edit/add): Also, check out this excerpt from CNN: (source: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/17/polygamy.custody/) ...I am, too, not for the government meddling into the personal affairs/marriage of adults. But if this is true, it might be considered child abuse (whether the child "wanted to" or not, bearing children at 13.. well.. I wouldn't call it healthy childhood at all). So beyond the polygamy, I think the problem was the children.

I just listened to "NPR Science Friday" podcast, where they talked about PubMed Central -- a project to publish medical/scientific research papers openly to the public. Check the episode out, you might find it interesting http://www.mefeedia.com/entry/nih-to-increase-accessibility-of-research/7994193/ And it's pretty cool too, they're going to have funding from the NIH... ~moo

Yeah thats what I thought -- see, I think that if they owuldn't have gone as far as they did (migration to a warmer place!??! i mean.. c'mon..) and just stuck with flapping of wing and circling the air, they'd get lots more people

I'm actually going to try that. I'm going to try a few things, I just finished talking to a chem professor at my uni.. he suggested a few tests I could do to check what exactly operates there. So... Expect a follow up vid with these tests

My best friend actually called me about this that day to ask me if its true. She was so excited about the "Cutie penguins that fly!" that I kinda felt bad to tell her what day it was...

Yeah it;'s pretty good, I just prefer to have a WYSIWYG bit to be able to actually see my code WHILE i code it it's a matter of habbit.

Yeha, the only reason I'm using dreamweaver is to see my hand-written code visually at the second i'm writing it... I *rarely* use the WYSIWYG window. I am not too fond of NVU because it doesn't support php very well, so I use notepad++ for code highlighting, or just dreamweaver because I got used to it's comfortable way of suggesting tag closures (matter of habbit). Anyways, the OP sounded like he's looking for something quite basic -- I doubt he can start writing html by hand just yet. Starting out with a WYSIWYG editors might be a better idea for him/her, at least until (s)he's better at reading and writing the code. Microsoft in GENERAL is terrible for writing HTML... (just look at IE7!!!!!!! AAA!!!), and throughout its history it inserted crap-code inside your pages and bloated them. I wouldn't recommend using it, and if someone's starting out -- then it's best they don't get used to it at all. ~moo

NVU is free.. and quite good: http://www.nvu.com/ (replaced by "Kompozer" which is also free: http://www.kompozer.net/) read a bit about html, xhtml, and CSS would be my suggestion, then start experimenting with it and building your site

Time doesn't move, we experience time without controlling or directly intercepting it, so for us it 'goes forward', but there is no movement in it at all. In fact, the existence of time DEFINES movement (= change of location in relation to time). Time itself doesn't move. ~moo btw... I am just watching "COSMOS" again, and Sagan is explaining dimensions in this episode really nicely: He shows a clear cube, how it casts a shadow on a flat sorface. Flat creatures don't see the CUBE, they only see its shadow, and as such, they don't quite see the cube itself, so their definition of it is different. That's a very good visualization to what happens in terms of time (4 dimension) and us (3 dimensions) -- we don't "see" or "perceive" time, we only see its effect on us ---> it's "shadow" on OUR dimensions. Does that sound better?

Where? Please, I'm willing to go over the proof, just ... produce it already, so we can examine it and its viability. I'm waiting.