Retrocausality and the effects on a timeline

Can you direct me to that reference?
No, unfortunately I can't. I remember reading about it online in 2002, as that was the year I got married. I was talking to a friend about it, and he was joking with me saying that I was now a married man & should be spending time with my wife instead of talking non-sense with him, lol. I can't remember what site I read it on but have seen mention of it in recent years on forums such as GLP.Here is reference to someone mentioning about an alternate memory of Mandela's death, that was posted in 2008, so is pre-2013 (which is the date you mentioned)

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread369370/pg1&mem=

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, unfortunately I can't. I remember reading about it online in 2002, as that was the year I got married. I was talking to a friend about it, and he was joking with me saying that I was now a married man & should be spending time with my wife instead of talking non-sense with him, lol. I can't remember what site I read it on but have seen mention of it in recent years on forums such as GLP.Here is reference to someone mentioning about an alternate memory of Mandela's death, that was posted in 2008, so is pre-2013 (which is the date you mentioned)http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread369370/pg1&mem=
Mylo,Here's the problem with this sort of evidence. Dr. Mandela and his wife were constantly under death threats by a multitude of factions for alleged bonehead plays by both of them. This went on for decades. He was a major political player in an emerging country suffering civil war. He was most definitely not the only potential leader that the revolutionaries wanted to see in power, He had significant enemies within the revolutionary parties. Billions of people knew who he was and hundreds of millions were on the Internet. Should it surprise you to find dozens if not hundreds of such posts? Even if .001% posted similar thoughts you would have dozens of them. We're here on a funky forum and people post weirdness on a daily basis. That they post it doesn't make it true or even fodder for consideration.

You don't have to apply Occam's razor. Apply the scientific method. People post what some consider to be visions of the future. What's the null hypothesis (H_0)? The posts are normal random thoughts unrelated to predicting future events. Now look at the posts. Is there sufficient evidence in them to logically reject the null hypothesis? (The crux here is a proper experimental design.) If the evidence does not rise to a predetermined significance level you don't reject the hull hypothesis. Likewise you don't state that the posts are false simply because you don't reject H_0. To do that you posit an alternative hypothesis (H_1) and check the evidence against the alternative.

In the end if you don't have sufficient convincing evidence you don't conclude that this is some sort of precognition. It remains in the realm of background noise.

 
I was asked to answer this question as they're having trouble with the issue.

Retrocausality can happen one of two ways. One is by a large meteorite landing in a remote zone, such as The New Jersey Triangle. This area to where there is a paved road that goes through the area, occasionally makes traffic disappear never to be found. To date one very large bakery truck is unaccounted for and this reporting is in FATE Magazine archives under,(New Jersey Triangle).I believe the article which is a few years old will mention the bakery truck gobbled by this natural occurrence. *Magnetic rays sometimes come out of the central points over meteorites, due to Earth seismic below the meteor moments.

The second precedent of retrocausality can be made from a linear accelerator or a large nuclear accident, to where there is a considerable give-off in the electromagnetic range. Now what this action does is in similar fashion to someone taking a 33 1/3 vinyl record, putting it in an oven and then with heat protective gloves, when that record is taken out, waves are placed in the record disk, then this is your time platter model for the action of retrocausality.

If you look at the record on end, or from the side as a line a segment, you will see up and down waves. Now know close enough to reality, there are part of the record, to where the wave is close enough to where it was before it had been deformed in the oven. These areas if this record could be named time, be clear and placed over an area, would be recorded by the people in that near normal edge of the record, is regular time.

However' people in the areas to where the waves would peak, would automatically be shifted to another section of reality. Events might or might not seem to pass as they have been doing, however certain characters or known people in the altered zones of our time record, may or may not be there, or may have their fates changed.

This action reflects on how the news is reported from those altered sections surrounding your key generating phenomenon point.

What is thought, is that during the said Montauk experiments at the decommissioned Montauk Air Force base, as reported by a few authors that had worked there, is that a ray of altered time effects had branched out, so altering both time occurrence happenings, along with a projected sine or wave height of areas surrounding the central generating point.

Now as per your searches on retrocausality, you can see what if Mr. such and such was said to have died on a certain date and this was reported to the news, but in another section the passing of Mr. Such and Such did not occur and he may even still re-conflicting reports of that person being alive, or dead.

The last use of retrocausality has a death penalty added to it and this is the use of the distorting of time periods to politically affect the choices or opinions of people in a certain area. This is also known as time engineering. One of my instructors here once told me, that on some worlds or stars systems if they catch you doing this, that this is an automatic death penalty. You’re summarily executed on the spot. I know in the telling of large Drack time police, if they catch you doing time engineering, they may stun you, but if you persist, they may kill you.

Time engineering is used by the beings from Sirius Star System supposedly for this section of space. But this is performed from a group decision to be allowed to do so. Sirians are very nice. Look up (county sheriff is given tour of Sirian spaceship blocking road).That sheriff was told then, years back that the Sirians would try and help us.

Before I end here, I was to ask, was this disclosure clear enough to understand? Is my English okay in your understanding of how I am speaking to you all? Also' are the technical points all clear enough that most everyone does not have an undue degree of difficulty understanding what I am trying to explain to you in concepts? If not, then please let me know. Thank you so much, Pinter

 
The second precedent of retrocausality can be made from a linear accelerator or a large nuclear accident, to where there is a considerable give-off in the electromagnetic range. Now what this action does is in similar fashion to someone taking a 33 1/3 vinyl record, putting it in an oven and then with heat protective gloves, when that record is taken out, waves are placed in the record disk, then this is your time platter model for the action of retrocausality.If you look at the record on end, or from the side as a line a segment, you will see up and down waves. Now know close enough to reality, there are part of the record, to where the wave is close enough to where it was before it had been deformed in the oven. These areas if this record could be named time, be clear and placed over an area, would be recorded by the people in that near normal edge of the record, is regular time.

However' people in the areas to where the waves would peak, would automatically be shifted to another section of reality. Events might or might not seem to pass as they have been doing, however certain characters or known people in the altered zones of our time record, may or may not be there, or may have their fates changed.
I found this to be an easy to digest way of explaining it, thank you. The record being heated or shaped fits pretty well with my understanding of space and time, and I can definitely see how small cracks and bubbles in it would cause time to react in unpredictable ways, which was my original point in posting the topic.It seems a bit less crazy to me now.

 
Mylo,Here's the problem with this sort of evidence. Dr. Mandela and his wife were constantly under death threats by a multitude of factions for alleged bonehead plays by both of them. This went on for decades. He was a major political player in an emerging country suffering civil war. He was most definitely not the only potential leader that the revolutionaries wanted to see in power, He had significant enemies within the revolutionary parties. Billions of people knew who he was and hundreds of millions were on the Internet. Should it surprise you to find dozens if not hundreds of such posts? Even if .001% posted similar thoughts you would have dozens of them. We're here on a funky forum and people post weirdness on a daily basis. That they post it doesn't make it true or even fodder for consideration.You don't have to apply Occam's razor. Apply the scientific method. People post what some consider to be visions of the future. What's the null hypothesis (H_0)? The posts are normal random thoughts unrelated to predicting future events. Now look at the posts. Is there sufficient evidence in them to logically reject the null hypothesis? (The crux here is a proper experimental design.) If the evidence does not rise to a predetermined significance level you don't reject the hull hypothesis. Likewise you don't state that the posts are false simply because you don't reject H_0. To do that you posit an alternative hypothesis (H_1) and check the evidence against the alternative.

In the end if you don't have sufficient convincing evidence you don't conclude that this is some sort of precognition. It remains in the realm of background noise.
Darby, very interesting response."Dr. Mandela."

Never heard him being referred to as Dr. Mandela before. I was aware that he had received a honorary doctorate, but you are the first to call him Dr Mandela (but I'm now straying off topic).

"In the end if you don't have sufficient convincing evidence you don't conclude that this is some sort of precognition."

Yes, I agree. What you say makes logical sense. But I believe that there are some occurences in life that cannot be easily explained by science/scientific evaluation etc.

For example, a girl makes a post on a forum, stating that she has just heard an announcement on the radio that Prince William & Princess Kate have a baby daughter, and have named her Charlotte Elizabeth Diana. Others in the forum, inform the girl that she is wrong, and that Princess Kate has not yet had the baby. The girl is adamant she heard the news on the radio. 1 week later, the media announces the news that Princess Kate has had a baby girl and a few days later, announce that the new Princesses name is Charlotte Elizabeth Diana. How does science explain the accuracy of the unintentional prediction made in a forum?

 
Top