Claude Latremouille wrote:
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 16:34:46 GMT, Cardinal Chunder
<cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote about what
*
Claude Latremouille wrote:
And I think some people are too stupid to realize that a
genius like Nostradamus could indeed hide something with
numbers, e.g., IX-49, where he uses the numbering of the
quatrain to suggest the year of the decapitation of Charles
I (1649), which is the subject of this quatrain.
*
Clever, eh, this Nostradamus?!
*
But that is much too much to swallow for a clueless brain.
*
Claude Latrémouille
On a similar note, my mobile phone has the digits 9 1 1 in it. Clearly
my phone network was hiding these to suggest the date of September 11th
attack.
*
Only if you are an American. Nostradamus was not an American so
your example is perfectly pointless with respect to his texts.
*
Erm, has this message been in a time warp for the last year?
And yes my example is relevant. It demonstrates that you can pluck
meaningless coincidences out of anything if you bother to look hard enough.
Clever eh?
*
Actually, I would say the opposite.
*
Irony is like bronzey but it's made of iron.
Or perhaps the kind of pure coincidence that rational people [...]
*
Ah, rational people... You mean people who think like you?
Look up rational in a dictionary.
would
properly recognize as meaningless pap. After all my phone network doles
out thousands of numbers a day and Nosty doled out hundreds of numbered
quatrains.
*
Showing once again that you are not very clever. Nostradamus
'doled out' exactly *nine* quatrains bearing the number 49.
So what? My network doles out an exact and small percentage of numbers
containing 911. What does that mean? Zip.
*
Out of these nine, only in IX-49 does he refer (vaguely, as
usual) to the decapitation of King Charles I on January 30, 1649.
So, if you were *really* clever, you would have said: Out of nine
quatrains bearing the number 49, Nostradamus used IX-49 to point
to an event having occurred in 1649; this may have been a
coincidence, or may not have been.
This is called selective sampling. Why discount the thousands that came
to naught or are that vague they could fit to dozens of things?
Do you think a lottery winner has prophetic powers for winning the
jackpot? Perhaps one might think so if you ignored all those that didn't
win.
It is not surprising that on occasion a significant
connection could be formed just by chance alone.
*
As you have not indicated if you do consider quatrain IX-49 to
refer to the decapitation of Charles I, thereby establishing what
can be called a coincidence, how can you speak of chance alone in
this case?
I consider that I would score hits if I issued thousands of quatrains
ranging from the precise to the vague / gibberish and gave myself an
unlimited time (even hundreds of years) for them to be 'fulfilled'
Would it mean anything?
Nope.
.
