+ Reply to Thread
Page 38 of 42 FirstFirst ... 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 LastLast
Results 371 to 380 of 411

Thread: Thoughts and Findings related to the Maranatha "Key" Pt. II

  1. #371
    hayward's Avatar
    hayward is offline Good Twelever Aquamarine hayward is an unknown quantity at this point
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jlockest View Post
    Ahh, an impasse. Odd how perception is from a particular standpoint eh? As from my point of view you steadfastly and consistently refuse to say how you selected your start point - you said in the Dagobert article, just start with the R without presenting any rhyme or reason as to why. Then you draw similar constructs on other artworks without again explaining how or why you selected various points to build the construct. I think the problem is that you can't - you don't know why - but you still want people to believe the construct was intended by the artist. C'est la vie.
    Ahem, someone asked to show how to construct the dagobert parchment hexagram? Its produced through obsevation. No one will fuly understand the geometry unless they draw it. So. The line?

  2. #372
    hayward's Avatar
    hayward is offline Good Twelever Aquamarine hayward is an unknown quantity at this point
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hayward View Post
    Ahem, someone asked to show how to construct the dagobert parchment hexagram? Its produced through obsevation. No one will fuly understand the geometry unless they draw it. So. The line?
    Come on I'll walk you through it. No more talk about the perimeter. You'll have to get right in it if you want to get your answer.

  3. #373
    hayward's Avatar
    hayward is offline Good Twelever Aquamarine hayward is an unknown quantity at this point
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    934

    Default

    This video is for anyone else who is interested in seeing how I initially found the geometry on the Dagobert parchment. For anyone who might have used image of the original parchment and the image from the MW article, this should have sttod as sufficient in confirming the gemetric shape with the points in the parchment. Please view at large scale since there are small dots being indicated in the video that are the crucial points for much os this geometry.

    https://youtu.be/4ziyVphPPKE

  4. #374
    jlockest is offline Expert Twelever Sapphire jlockest is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hayward View Post
    Ahem, someone asked to show how to construct the dagobert parchment hexagram? Its produced through obsevation. No one will fuly understand the geometry unless they draw it. So. The line?
    No - it now seems that you're back tracking again. I asked how you selected the start point as you had said, and I quote:
    '...The Dagobert Parchment of Rennes Le Chateau fame also contains a similar form.

    The steps for finding this are as follows:

    Starting with the raised R in the center of the document, use this point as the center point. ...'

    I went on to say that the point seemed arbitrary - and you kept on insisting that it wasn't, while all the time refusing to say what plan/method/system you used for selecting it.

    Are you now saying it was selected 'through observation' - and is then arbitrary after all?

  5. #375
    jlockest is offline Expert Twelever Sapphire jlockest is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hayward View Post
    This video is for anyone else who is interested in seeing how I initially found the geometry on the Dagobert parchment. For anyone who might have used image of the original parchment and the image from the MW article, this should have sttod as sufficient in confirming the gemetric shape with the points in the parchment. Please view at large scale since there are small dots being indicated in the video that are the crucial points for much os this geometry.

    https://youtu.be/4ziyVphPPKE

    Well, it's probably me, but I didn't get any sound. So I'm not sure my commenting is valid. But you must be able to answer anyway, so here goes:
    In the video you start with the symbol top left. Why? Why start with that symbol? Why not one of the + signs? Why not the PS bottom right? Why not any one of the other characters on the document?
    That symbol can be projected in various directions or could be used as the centre or a point on the circumference of a circle or could be the centre or edge of a square or....Why did you select the line you did? Why did you decide a straight line was correct rather than a curve or spiral?
    You then project a line and decide to stop on a + point. Why? Why stop there - as you go onto to project from the that + to another on the document which you then project through the point - why? Why in one case stop on the symbol and in the other project through?

    It seems that you've gone from one arbitrary point to many. But presumably that is because I couldn't hear the sound track where you explained why/how you picked those points, why/how you chose the directions for projection, why/how you chose whether a line or curve suited, why/how you selected dimension (ie end points)....

    I stopped after the second line as I assumed I'd keep having the same questions in the rest of your construction.

  6. #376
    jlockest is offline Expert Twelever Sapphire jlockest is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hayward View Post
    Come on I'll walk you through it. No more talk about the perimeter. You'll have to get right in it if you want to get your answer.
    I think H, having seen your video and the (without sound) arbitrariness of point selection, line type selection, dimension selection, I'm no longer interested.

    Can't you seriously see that the only way you could ever have constructed your shape is by knowing that shape in the first place? Just in the first two lines, there are so many options that it would take you hours/weeks to plot all the possible options. But YOU decided, because of pre knowledge of a shape that you wanted to create. Oh well.

  7. #377
    hayward's Avatar
    hayward is offline Good Twelever Aquamarine hayward is an unknown quantity at this point
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jlockest View Post
    I think H, having seen your video and the (without sound) arbitrariness of point selection, line type selection, dimension selection, I'm no longer interested.

    Can't you seriously see that the only way you could ever have constructed your shape is by knowing that shape in the first place? Just in the first two lines, there are so many options that it would take you hours/weeks to plot all the possible options. But YOU decided, because of pre knowledge of a shape that you wanted to create. Oh well.
    Lets say that someone asks you to draw a house. Where is the right place to start, J? The door, the roof? Is there only one place in your world for this to occur? Can you dtaw a hexagram? Where do you start? Upper corner? Right one? Why?

    Have you ever seen a connect the dots game? Lets say you do a connect the dots with no numbers. What "system" or "method" would be involved? What mathematical formula would there be? Based on your criteria there would never be a solution because you need instructions.

    You seem to ignore this simple fact: whether or not you like the means of how the shape is produced, it is still there, with each corner justified through the dots and plus signs in the parchment. You ignore the fact that connecting the lines, signs and dots in the parchment to produce a shape of exact geometry, that being: two equalteral triangles overlapping and tilted to a 45 degree center line.

    This is what I mean when I suggest that you dont observe. Youd rather stay in the realm of trying to figure out "WHY?"

    Your criteria for refuting this fact is in complete denial of reality. I can give you several examples and you will continue along the same line of discussion because that is what you choose to do. Just as you repeatedly return to the point that I stated to start with the R. A person could have drawn the shape with those instructions also. As I have replied over and over, I used that description as a means of simplifying the approach of drawing that shape.

    So again, there is not only one means to draw a shape.

    Your query, I think, it's trying to establish probable cause through finding a motive. Which is looking in the wrong place since again you ignor the simple fact of what is there.

    So why don't you address this question. Put aside your need of finding out "who donnit?" and ask this: What is the liklihood of an accidental, perfect and regular geometric form being justified by the placement of diliberate points in the paper? The line of the angle device goes directly to the "plus sign". If you draw a line between that and the next plus sign you get an angle of 60degrees. That is 1/3 of an equaleteral triangle. And then so on and so forth with each additional line drawn.

    Every line drawn is a connection between two points which are designated in the original parchment. What of this? This is the proof. Nothing more nothing less. Whether you like how it was produced--- the actually of being able to draw this geometry in the parchment using these points in the parchment remains. The fact that this shape exists in the parchment remains.

  8. #378
    Rubyfelixir's Avatar
    Rubyfelixir is offline Twelever Silver Rubyfelixir is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    In Australia.
    Posts
    383

    Default

    QUOTE JLOCKEST
    "That symbol can be projected in various directions or could be used as the centre or a point on the circumference of a circle or could be the centre or edge of a square or....Why did you select the line you did? Why did you decide a straight line was correct rather than a curve or spiral? You then project a line and decide to stop on a + point. Why? Why stop there - as you go onto to project from the that + to another on the document which you then project through the point - why? Why in one case stop on the symbol and in the other project through?"

    OK, OK everyone! Step back please!
    <slaps jlockest>

  9. #379
    jlockest is offline Expert Twelever Sapphire jlockest is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hayward View Post
    Lets say that someone asks you to draw a house. Where is the right place to start, J? The door, the roof? Is there only one place in your world for this to occur? Can you dtaw a hexagram? Where do you start? Upper corner? Right one? Why?
    Whoa. Good grief H - you totally miss it don't you? Either that or you're just being intentionally obtuse.
    I am not discussing about how you draw the lop sided hexagram-cum-circle-cum-square. D showed how that was constructed - it has been shown elsewhere. The issue I have is in HOW you select the points in the text and give them relevance. Using your argument I could take your constructed geometry, move it around the base document, change its scale and then give some pseudo importance to the elements of the text/items it touched at certain points.
    You also assume that the shape you're creating has some relevance anyway. You have taken what somebody else has said and simply tried to apply it to a document - and then totally ignored any other shapes that may be in that document.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hayward

    Have you ever seen a connect the dots game? Lets say you do a connect the dots with no numbers. What "system" or "method" would be involved? What mathematical formula would there be? Based on your criteria there would never be a solution because you need instructions.
    In the ones I've done, the dots have been numbered. So the formula is to start at any number and join from that number to the next highest/lowest. Obviously it's easier if you start at 1 (if the puzzle has a 1 ) and work up, but you don't have to.

    Quote Originally Posted by hayward
    You seem to ignore this simple fact: whether or not you like the means of how the shape is produced, it is still there, with each corner justified through the dots and plus signs in the parchment. You ignore the fact that connecting the lines, signs and dots in the parchment to produce a shape of exact geometry, that being: two equalteral triangles overlapping and tilted to a 45 degree center line.
    It is in your eyes becuae you have done two things. One you have automatically assumed that the shape you're drawing has some importance and secondly you are assigning importance to some parts of the base - which have no more importance than any other points. You decide they have importance. A bit like people who wake up at night and see the clock says '2:22' and think '...spooky, sacred numbers...'. The numbers have no importance outside of the mind of the viewer. I think your editor realised that H, and that's why he/she made you use 'sacred geometry' - to give some feeling of importance to a shape and subject that is in the mind of the viewer.

    Quote Originally Posted by hayward
    This is what I mean when I suggest that you dont observe. Youd rather stay in the realm of trying to figure out "WHY?"

    Your criteria for refuting this fact is in complete denial of reality. I can give you several examples and you will continue along the same line of discussion because that is what you choose to do. Just as you repeatedly return to the point that I stated to start with the R. A person could have drawn the shape with those instructions also. As I have replied over and over, I used that description as a means of simplifying the approach of drawing that shape.
    Denial of reality? I thought you did that? No? I told you to google the geometric shapes in paintings - and I thought you poo-poo'd them as only yours are real?

    The person could not have drawn the shape from the R without prior knowledge. To do that the R must be singled out from the text to have some importance. Then the person would have to have known a scale. Then the person would have to know what shape to construct and where that R fitted into that shape.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hayward
    So again, there is not only one means to draw a shape.
    I don't think I ever contested that at all. I did contest the relevance of the points chosen to make the shape - and the relevance of the shape itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by hayward
    Your query, I think, it's trying to establish probable cause through finding a motive. Which is looking in the wrong place since again you ignor the simple fact of what is there.
    Fact? The fact that you draw a shape - the you assume has some significance in the first place - and place it on a document or artwork and then give importance to the points it touches? Ignoring points it doesn't touch? What facts H?


    Quote Originally Posted by hayward
    So why don't you address this question. Put aside your need of finding out "who donnit?" and ask this: What is the liklihood of an accidental, perfect and regular geometric form being justified by the placement of diliberate points in the paper? The line of the angle device goes directly to the "plus sign". If you draw a line between that and the next plus sign you get an angle of 60degrees. That is 1/3 of an equaleteral triangle. And then so on and so forth with each additional line drawn.
    What about the other plus signs? You project to one plus then project through another - what is the rule /plan/method system in that?

    If I were you, I'd go back to joining up the dots H. Just for simplicity. Join up ALL the odd letters (ie raised ones) on the parchment, or join up all the plus signs or... but at least have some method or some way of showing that one letter is more significant than another.

    Or try this. Just pick up your geometric design and move it two characters to the right or left or up or down - and I bet you will get some characters under intersection points that have some relevance to someone - then try increasing or reducing the scale. Then think how many combinations you have in way of movement and scale - and see how many 'relevant' characters are touched.
    But even after all that, you still then have to show that your base geometric shape had any relevance anyway, let alone prove any form of intent on behalf of the author/artist.

    Quote Originally Posted by hayward
    Every line drawn is a connection between two points which are designated in the original parchment. What of this? This is the proof. Nothing more nothing less. Whether you like how it was produced--- the actually of being able to draw this geometry in the parchment using these points in the parchment remains. The fact that this shape exists in the parchment remains.
    Just do as I said above H - change the scale, change the position and I bet your lines connect points or lay on lines or....

    But it's 1:35 now and ...'oooh spooky - all odd sacred numbers...', and I have to go.

  10. #380
    Astral's Avatar
    Astral is offline Good Twelever Platinum Astral is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    750

    Default

    In the painting done by Poussin she sits silently in the background . In the virgin on the rocks she sits in full view. Who is she ?

    She is a cosmic force that animates nature bringing to life anything nature creates, she was with each and every person when they were born and gives life, but equally she brings death to your door. Her robes are always blue and a scene of nature always appears with her.

    You have to tame her to achieve a chemical marriage within the body.
    Everything is an illusion. With every action you create your future. With every thought you create your destiny. The only real thing is love. When you hurt another person you hurt yourself, When you forgive another person you forgive yourself. Many seek the holy grail, but you already have it. Wake up from the world of dreams you live in. Then you will find the answers you have always wanted.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 38 of 42 FirstFirst ... 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts