You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

equineluvr ago

1967 6+7=13, the number of Da Joos

The attack lasted for 67 (13 again) minutes

DonKeyhote ago

Huh? They thought it opportune to provoke a war then? And not in e.g. 1994? Then the official historian was told to record that it "lasted" 67 minutes? Doesnt using numerology make us like fools?

ArtificalDuality ago

No it doesn't. They don't use actual "traditional" numerology. What they use is a very simple rule set.

  • Addition, multiplication, subtraction is used
  • 0's are removed
  • 1's may be removed if not useful for additions/subtractions to get to a 6. It's done by multiplication by 1.
  • 6's and 9's may be turned up-side down to get a 6, or to get a 9
  • 12's are 2-packed 6'es.
  • 18's are 3-packed 6'es.
  • 36's are also 3-packed 6'es.

Important here is that by no means it is exact math. Visual manipulation (turning up-side down, or replication of 6's using a 3 is just as fine).

The goal is that their alignees can still "read" the flash sign so it shouldn't be overly complex. So long the prime goal is met: Using any of the above "rules" in an attempt to arrive at 3 6'es.

Example: London Terror Attack on 3 - 6 - 2017 yields us:

3 - 6, we can use the '36 = 3 packed 6'es" here. So this gives a 666 right there. (Year component not used)

Alternatively,

3-6-2017 -> Take 2 and 1 from 2017 and add to first 3. We now end up with (removing 'used' numbers)

6-6-7 -> subtract 1 from the 7 and multiply with it (eliminates the 1). -> 6-6-6.

Now all numbers have been juggled to get to a 3x6 in a simple fashion, using all the digits from the date.

The point of this whole is to stamp events and statements with the 666 flash sign/number to show alignees "We did it, support the narrative".

Secondly it is like a sports to them. The more "clever" the way to get to 3 666'es, the more likely a serious event is to play out (yes they plan in advance). This way, one can assign a % to the likeliness and severity of something happening at a 'prone' date.

I have been testing this algorithm in 2016 throughout the months April and May. The result was shocking and most my predictions based on the % proved true in regards to events and severities thereof.

And guess what: Today is exactly such date as 6-6-2017. It today is 9-6-2017. Instead of a 6, the day is now a 9. Well how to turn it back into a 6? Turn it up-side-down and the algo yiels exactly the same for 6-6-2017.