This page ‘greatly’ extends beyond the previous page and covers more ‘gender / propagation’ anomalies as well as ‘serious’ subtle twins propagating anomalies, plus it points out the anomalies that strongly suggest that we are simulating MANY hermaphrodite species here as ‘humans’ as well as more ‘obvious’, never mind deducible anomalies (based on what I’ve already written about on previous ‘simulation’ pages here) that would also result from slowing technological advances down in the simulation.
INTRO TO THIS PAGE: This page describes, many known about i.e. observed and hence documented ‘anomalies, oddities, artefacts, coincidences, synchronicity’s and or other clues’ and then the specific artificial reality configurations that can be logically laid out that will explain these.
I basically, present laid out and logical step by step arguments based on pre-defined and WRITTEN OUT information and common knowledge about different specific commonly known about artificial reality types, I then make you aware of specific as well as often ‘likely’ design problems, ‘conversion’ decisions and or project objective compromises and or ”rational’ security measures (managing a copied duplicated population for example) that one can deduce will likely be made by the designers of a specific type of artificial reality and particularly made under certain conditions and circumstances, which ‘coincidentally’ often turn out to be eminently ‘rational’ decision choices at least for specific deducible conditions and circumstances i.e. with a little ‘thinking’ these are deducible.
Let me give you some examples of these:
- Inherent UNAVOIDABLE Artificial Reality Design Problem: Such as simulating a population that was originally subjected to a massive invasive, privacy breaching data collection AND the TERROR EVENTS needed to justify this as part of gathering DETAILED PERSONAL data for the simulation project from everyone in the original population which would then AUTOMATICALLY happen to a the duplicated copied population living within the simulation the data was collected for.
- A Simulation Project ‘Conversion’ Decision: Such as converting the entire original asexual, androgynous SUBTLE population whether they were interfaced to a physical form or not into either a ‘human’ male or female, coincidentally, resulting in enormous numbers of ‘gender / transgender’ anomalies.
- A Simulation Project Agenda and or Project Objective Priority: Such as slowing down technological advances in your copied duplicated simulation project to make it impossible for that population to build the same simulation because if they do, then they will start to THINK as a simulation designer AND then start to figure out all sorts of things such as the Inherent UNAVOIDABLE Artificial Reality Design Problems and then they’ll realise that their own reality is ALREADY PRESENTING THESE (the massive invasive, privacy breaching data collection for example) as well as other anomalies that will appear due to a fake reality implementing ‘security measures’ (as well as others).
- A ‘FAKE’ Reality Will ‘Absolutely’ Implement Security Measures: Such as managing the entire population and particularly the academics and scientists to prevent them from being able to THINK in any decent way about ‘ANOMALIES’ and particularly to stop them from IN AN ORGANIZED FASHION having them concertedly spend time SYSTEMATICALLY trying to figure out if any anomalies could be ‘attributed’ to any of the already commonly known about artificial realities. As opposed to ourselves having absolutely no basic information or definitions or any descriptions of any artificial realities basic attributes or characteristics and or how they differ from a hypothetical real reality or EACH OTHER being presented on any web site allegedly discussing them (except for here)!!!!
So, in MYSELF rationally and objectively defining IN DETAIL the basic information, definitions and knowledge base, relating to what I am actually discussing here and then using these as foundation information to step by logical step take you through how different base configurations of different artificial ‘realities’ can be deduced to automatically and ABSOLUTELY result in the ‘presentation’ of some very specific as well as observable ‘anomaly, oddity, artefact and or set of coincidences or synchronicity’s and or other clues’ which then coincidentally WE HAVE VISIBLY PRESENTED HERE.
In other words, there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING presented on this page or in fact on any of the previous ‘simulation’ pages that are based on; a belief, wishful thinking, a feeling OR ANYTHING ELSE ‘vague’ and or ‘imaginatively’ speculative.
The previous page (can you still remember the points it made?) catalogued a whole range of ‘gender’ issues that one can deduce will arise if androgynous asexual subtle beings are being interfaced to an animal species that presents two distinctly different male and female gender forms. Coincidentally we have all of these gender issues presented in our fake reality here . . .
I then made the following observation:
” . . . isn’t it ‘seriously’ odd that whomever DELIBERATELY picked an animal species that presents two male and female gender separated body forms to interface a large androgynous subtle population to, would ‘actually’ do this when it is obvious that this will result in the presentation of very many different as well as ‘noticeable’ anomalous behaviours and experiences that are ALL ‘OBVIOUS’ CLUES that are very strongly ‘suggestive’ of a specific two bodies interfaced together ‘Matrix Reality’ arrangement!!!”
After which I posed this question:
“If you reading this were in charge of ‘interfacing’ a population to a specific animal form species then which very ‘specific’ species type would you yourself ‘specifically’ pick BECAUSE such a species would absolutely as well as automatically reduce the ‘observable’ presented anomalies down to virtually ‘nothing’? If you manage to figure this out then in knowing the most ‘likely’ species type that any ‘rational’ person would use then what else can you figure out that will then lead you to ‘naturally’ become aware of even more anomalous experience possibilities that ‘coincidentally’ are also related to gender and ‘propagation’ and which ‘coincidentally’, not only do we ALSO have visibly presented here BUT these anomalous behaviours and experiences have also been studied and documented by our researchers whom once again have completely failed to realise their significance as supporting evidence that our reality here is ENTIRELY FAKE?”
What thinking lines, awareness’s and or ‘insights’ does the above prompt or ‘ignite’?
Which specific species ‘animal’ type would you interface your androgynous asexual population to that would result in an automatic reduction in the presentation of gender related anomalies in the interfaced population down to ‘next to nothing’?
Well, what I personally figured out is that the best physical animal form species type to interface such a population to would be to use a hermaphrodite animal species. I.e. I’d use an animal species type that would present/offer both male and female sexual characteristics and functioning in one single physical body. This would be the most logical species body type to use to represent the asexual androgynous subtle form because the use of a single hermaphrodite form would massively reduce the presentation of observable ‘anomalous’ experiences and anomalous expectations that are the deducible outcome of the use of a species that has two completely independent body forms, one to represent the female gender ‘procreating’ body and the other the male ‘sperm donating/grunting’ form (haha).
If you manage to get this far then it doesn’t take much more ‘pondering’ about artificial reality; artefact and anomaly ‘generation’ possibilities before you may become aware of some likely as well as ‘rational’ possibilities that it might be worth spending even more time considering and speculating about . . .
“‘IF’ we here were to be ‘hypothetically’ simulating people/humans here whom were actually REALLY interfaced to an animal form that was ACTUALLY REALLY a hermaphrodite species then what ‘additional’ as well as exceptionally OBVIOUS anomalous experiences, behaviours and physical body symptoms will you absolutely have visibly presented because you absolutely cannot avoid having them being displayed here SPECIFICALLY because all dual gender hermaphrodites would now be being simulated here as definitively either male or female only?”
What anomalous experiences/behaviours/physical body symptoms would you expect to have presented if we are simulating a physical population of hermaphrodites, all living the behaviours and experiences you would expect if you had hermaphrodites in relationships having children all now converted by software into a one size fits all human form that has distinctly separate male and female gender bodies?
What clues, would you expect to have presented if we are SIMULATING’ hermaphrodite animal form ‘couples’ that have been translated and are now living as either a human male or a human female?
Let me explain how a competent thinker would approach figuring this out . . .
As a start, imagine that you are a hermaphrodite, such that shockingly your body has both male and female sex organs and ‘functioning’.
Your ‘mate’, the hermaphrodite person you are paired with will also ‘shockingly’ have both male and female characteristics, sex organs and associated body functions.
So, what is the serious problem ‘IF’ two hermaphrodites that originally had a few children are being ‘accurately’ simulated here such that in our artificial fake reality here one is being permanently simulated as the human female while the other is being permanently presented as a human male?
What stupidly obvious ‘problems’ would this converted arrangement result in?
Well, the problem is that it is highly probable that a hermaphrodite couple will take turns being the one that is pregnant. In other words hermaphrodites, in there being absolutely no battle between the sexes (because they are both, BOTH sexes simultaneously) then it is HIGHLY LIKELY that they will alternate in terms of who will become pregnant, carry the baby and give birth.
So, ‘if’ we are hypothetically simulating couples here that are hermaphrodites then the serious problem is that the two gendered human form ‘arrangement’ defaults to only allowing the human female to become pregnant and have a baby. The human male in not having any of the female anatomical body ‘functions’ is completely exempted from this possibility.
Unfortunately, ‘IF’ we are living in a simulation AND we are simulating people whom were originally hermaphrodite couples while VERY likely also simulating the life and experiences and behaviours of the original person pretty accurately then you would EXPLICITLY ‘EXPECT’ that this will ‘absolutely’ result in at least some and possibly ‘many’ males here bizarrely EXHIBITING THE SYMPTOMS OF BEING PREGNANT. This would happen despite that they are obviously absolutely NOT pregnant and despite that it is impossible for them to become pregnant.
A hermaphrodite male that is being simulated reasonably ‘accurately’ is very likely to present pregnancy symptoms when they are living through the phase ‘representing’ when they ACTUALLY WERE PREGNANT despite that they are ‘obviously’ not ‘really’ pregnant as the human male form here.
Have you heard of the condition here called ‘sympathetic pregnancy’? This is a condition in which the human male actually presents ‘definitive’ symptoms that are associated with being pregnant. I.e. the symptoms of this condition ‘imply’ that the human male is pregnant.
In other words the symptoms of the condition called ‘sympathetic pregnancy’ are exactly what you would expect to have presented ‘IF’ we are accurately simulating hermaphrodite couples here.
What would be your guess as to the statistical ‘incidence’ of this condition? If you were to guess then how common would you imagine this condition to be? Would you expect that the incidence would be less than 0.1%, less than 1%, or less than 10% of the male population showing these pregnancy symptoms?
Strangely, the ‘sympathetic pregnancy’ wikipedia page doesn’t actually give any indication of how common or uncommon this condition is. In this respect, it may then come as a shock to find that studies have shown that this condition is presented in over 20% of the male population in the UK and over 30% of the male population in Australia. Both of these studies only recorded the OBVIOUS pregnancy symptoms and dismissed those that presented just a few or minor symptoms.
Basically, we are ‘definitively’ presenting the easily deduced anomalous experiences/symptoms that a MALE HUMAN would exhibit here if they are simulating someone that WAS A PREGNANT FEMALE.
In other words, we are presenting strong ‘evidence’ that we are simulating ‘people’ here that were originally interfaced to a hermaphrodite species i.e. a species that had both male and female body characteristics and functioning in one single body form.
From the above, it would be ‘rational’ to suggest that it appears to be likely that the simulation designers don’t like hermaphrodite species. In other words, they appear to have a very strong preference to having all ‘free’ subtle forms plus all those that are already interfaced to a physical animal form, ALL ‘converted’ in the simulation into the bi-gendered physical aka ‘human’ animal species. The outcome of this is that everyone is forcibly made to live as either a male or a female ‘human’ despite that this results in many and various (as well as deducible) anomalous experiences and expectations. As an extension to this, it is therefore also somewhat likely that the simulation designers themselves preferentially use the ‘human’ species to incarnate their own subtle population into the original physical environment and have a preference (no matter how bizarre or twisted) to forcibly incarnate an entirely asexual androgynous species into a sexual animal species that separates subtle individuals with identical bodies into two separate gender body forms, each with separate gender functions, behaviours as well as roles within their own simulation project.
In other words this was done either as a ‘Simulation Project ‘Conversion’ Decision’ or as a ‘Simulation Project Agenda and or Project Objective Priority’ or perhaps as some combination of both of these.
What other stupendously obvious anomalous ‘coincidental’ experiences will a simulated duplicated population visibly present because they are specifically simulating splitting TWINS/TRIPLETS etc whom on splitting then each have ‘exactly’ the same historical origins?
At the start of the previous page you were made aware that we are exceptionally likely to be ‘representing’ subtle beings whom divide asexually, which essentially means that they ‘generate’ duplicated versions of themselves which will always result in the ‘propagation’ of two or more beings whom then each have identical past histories, memories and experiences from before the splitting point.
So, for anyone that was stupid enough to DARE to attempt to simulate this entire population even reasonably accurately then what stupendously obvious and ENTIRELY VISIBLE problems/artefacts would end up being visibly presented within the resulting ’emulated’ population?
Well, what will happen when one single subtle person inclusive of their memories and experiences of their entire past is then duplicated or triplicated? Well this means that at this exact ‘duplicating’ point, you will end up with 2 or 3 or more subtle ‘forms/people’ whom have each then ‘lived’ exactly the same history up until the moment of the splitting/dividing point. Each of these ‘twins’ will then have exactly the same history, experiences and memories up to that point in time, after which their experiences will diverge and be different.
To ‘simulate’ each of these people reasonably accurately then you are going to have to simulate each of them through their past as living exactly the same life until they get to the ACTUAL historical time point where they ‘split/divided’ at which point they will then lead independent separate lives and accumulate independent separate experiences. Basically, the simulation designer of ‘this’ simulation would be FORCED to simulate multiple sets of people each or whom will be living ‘exactly’ the same life inclusive of the same experiences pretty much SIMULTANEOUSLY? In other words, in the simulation you will end up having to simultaneously ‘present’ many sets of ‘identical’ people whom are essentially each living the same life in parallel . . .
Well, in this being a ‘nightmare’ scenario for a simulation designer then at the very least you’d likely have an entire EAAS department researching and spending time trying to work out how to disguise the ‘fact’ that some and perhaps many people are all living parallel lives. In which case, if we are simulating this population ‘accurately’ then it’s very likely we would also be simulating the people who were originally doing this research which will then result in a ‘vaguely’ equivalent research project focused on the ‘twins/triplet’ problem being presented in our own duplicated reality here (again in a disguised form). It’s very likely that this research project in its presentations ‘HERE’ would be taking ‘identical’ twins and separating them at birth and giving each twin to completely different families which would hopefully lead them to live pseudo ‘parallel’ lives that wouldn’t be noticed AND in this being somewhat highly unethical both in the original reality as well as here, this research project here would be trying to keep this ‘research’ as quiet as possible (coincidentally, such a research project is described on this page here).
If ‘hypothetically’, you were the designer of this ‘simulation’ then how would you approach trying to keep the worrying ‘FACT’ that you are presenting many people that are essentially duplicates of each other, with pretty much ALL of these identical duplicated people living, lives that are not only essentially THE SAME, BUT which will also ‘by and large’ be happening IN PARALLEL to each other ‘HIDDEN either from the ‘twins’ themselves or to others in the population and particularly allegedly ‘OBSERVANT’ others?
Let me make it ‘plain’ here, these ‘duplicated’ people being defined and ‘rendered’ in a full simulation by software would have a ‘script’ defining their entire past history. For ‘duplicates’ of the same person their script would be exactly the same up to the point where the person they are simulating was ‘split/divided’. Basically, until that point, until the ‘splitting/dividing’ point, each of their life scripts would be ‘exactly’ the same. This would mean that it would be very likely that each simulated ‘twin’ would have the same name/identity, they ‘should’ meet and have a relationship with the same type of person (someone ‘equivalent’ to their original ‘subtle’ partner) who would also likely have the same or similar ‘name’ in the simulation, they should also have the same major events happening in their lives at pretty much the same time. This would particularly be the case for important and or major, i.e. life ‘defining’ events and particularly ‘public’ ones as well as ‘accidents’. In other words ‘important’ events/incidents would happen to each split/duplicated version and these events would ALSO very likely happen at the same time.
Is there any evidence of separated ‘twins’ living pretty much identical lives?
Well, having read some examples of astounding ‘twins’ coincidences AND unbelievably find people mentioning the word ‘genetics’ with respect to these ‘coincidences’ then let me state that from a ‘genetic’ point of view ‘YES’ you’d expect identical twins to have the same sort of job, be good at the same types of things and be attracted to the same type of person. However, what you would absolutely NOT expect to happen and which IF THESE DID HAPPEN you ‘should’ expect utter CONSTERNATION would be if very specific ‘external’ aspects of twins lives were duplicated, like for example the name of the person they married or the name of their offspring or that they had identical accidents (or all three of these happening)? To even suggest that ‘genes’ somehow code this type of information in such precise detail would imply that ‘genetics’ is pre-defining their future IN DETAIL, which would then DIRECTLY imply that our ‘brand’ of genetics is a ‘sham’, a cover up, attempting to keep ‘hidden’ and make ‘obscure’ the possibility that people’s lives are actually completely pre-determined i.e. your name, your spouse’s name, the name of your dog is CODED INTO GENES to such a degree that these codes define VERY SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF YOUR FUTURE? Is that ‘realistic’?
Coincidentally, there are MANY examples of utterly amazing stories of siblings, twins, identical twins as well as apparently duplicated lives of people that don’t know each other BUT have the same name (i.e. they seem to have no apparent past ‘physical’ family or genetic connections).
A search for:
- examples of incredible identical twin lives
- amazing coincidences
- unbelievably coincidences
- examples of unbelievable historical event coincidences
Reveal many ‘unbelievable’ coincidences, some of which I’ll present below:
1. Twin boys in Ohio were separated at birth, they were both adopted by different families. Despite that these families didn’t know each other, both families named the boys James (would genetics impact the adopting family or did the baby persuade them to name them James telepathically?). They then married a women called Linda and they both had sons, in one case the son was named James Alan and in the other the son was named James Allan. Both of them also divorced their wives and then they each yet again married a woman with the same name in this case called Betty. They also both had a dog named Toy (Source: Reader’s Digest, January 1980).
2. brothers, both riding exactly the same ‘moped’ killed on the same street, by the very same taxi, driven by the same taxi driver, carrying the very same passenger, in the same month one year apart (Source: Phenomena: A Book of Wonders, John Michell and Robert J. M. Rickard)
3. A German Magazine (Das Besteran), held a writing competition in 1979 asking readers to send in real life stories that included unusual events and occurrences. The competition was won by a Walter Kellner with a story about himself having engine trouble while flying a small plane (a Cessna 41) between Sardinia and Sicily. In his story, engine trouble caused him to have to land in the water, after which he was rescued. However, an Austrian man then informed the magazine that the winner of the prize must have plagiarized the story because virtually the same thing had happened to himself. Coincidentally, this man was also named Waltner Kellner. On checking both stories, the magazine then found that they were both true, despite being nearly identical.
The MANY ‘twins / triplets’ living duplicated / parallel lives in a simulation scenario is of course, yet another: Inherent UNAVOIDABLE Artificial Reality Design Problem: I.e. the designers cannot do anything about this, they absolutely have to build into the simulation all sorts of sleight of hand work-around’s that ‘absolutely’ cannot be done without visible ‘consequences’ (as described above).
What if you are a ‘noble’ and you are going to be made a queen or a king? In other words, what if you become aware that your future life is going to be dictated by the affairs of state and become very regimented? Under these circumstances, it is actually quite likely that specific people (and particularly those that may be ‘simulated’ as ‘originally’ having direct knowledge of themselves as a subtle being) would decide to duplicate themselves so that at least one version of themselves would be ‘free’ to lead a more normal life and particularly for that ‘split’ to do something that they really enjoyed!!! If this ‘split’ was consciously made under these circumstances i.e. for very good reasons and with knowledge of why they made this ‘split’ then you would also EXPECT that this king or queen would from time to time occasionally meet up with their subtle twin to find out how they were doing? For the ‘simulation’ i.e. for a fake reality trying to ‘pretend’ that everything is ‘real’ this scenario would be a ‘nightmare’ . . .
Let me remind you of what I wrote above . . . .
“This would mean that it would be very likely that each simulated ‘twin’ would have the same name, they ‘should’ meet and have a relationship with the same type of person (someone ‘equivalent’ to their original partner) who would also likely have the same or similar ‘name’ in the simulation, they should also have the same major events happening in their lives at pretty much the same time. In other words major, i.e. ‘defining’ life events and particularly ‘public’ ones as well as ‘accidents’ would happen to each split/duplicated version and these events would ALSO very likely happen at the same time.”
4. Coincidentally, in Monza, Italy, about a century ago, the Italian King of that time Umberto (the first), decided to go to a small restaurant for dinner. While the owner was taking the King’s order, the King noticed that they were almost doubles of each other. This then prompted both men to compare different aspects of their lives which caused them to become aware that their lives had many ‘unbelievable’ similarities. For example:
- Date of Birth: It turned out that both men were called Umberto and had been born on the same day (March 14th, 1844) in the same town.
- Marriage / life partner: They had both married a woman called Margherita.
- Obviously ‘Synchronized/Defining’ Life Role/Position: They also became aware that the restaurant owner had opened his restaurant on the same day that Umberto I was crowned King of Italy.
- Obviously ‘Synchronized/Anomalous’ Death Experience: On the 29th July 1900 the King was informed that the restaurant owner had died in a mysterious shooting accident, later that day, i.e. the same day the King himself was assassinated.
The above example is exactly what you would expect (you can PREDICT/DEDUCE) will happen if ‘duplicated’ people with identical timelines are being rendered in a ‘simulation’.
The film series ‘Orphan Black’ is focused around a woman whom gradually becomes aware that she has multiple versions of herself living lives, often in many different countries whom she gradually becomes aware of, meets and spends time with them. Coincidentally, the back story is of some secret cult’s ‘secret’ genetic experiment about generating twins while trying to make sure they don’t become aware of this. I.e. it’s a ‘project’ about efforts to try and keep secret the existence of people having many different ‘twins’ of themselves. Again, this is very likely a ‘series’ LOOSELY based on the long term ‘experiences / decisions / outcomes’ of the EAAS department tasked with writing the software to keep these SUBTLE ‘twin’ problems obscured which will of course involve having twins as SUBTLE BEINGS being interfaced to and incarnated as far away from each other as possible (i.e. incarnating them into other countries and cultures would be a great idea).
The above can also be categorised as yet another: Inherent UNAVOIDABLE Artificial Reality Design Problem: In this case when your simulated population is living through the times when the simulation they are in was actually built, then despite that on an earlier page in this series I described in detail how you’d attempt to hide the ‘main’ aspects of this ‘massive’ project by splitting it all up into individual, separated out parts, doing this will ‘still’ result in many of these separate parts resulting in ‘presentations’ that in some cases will still STRONGLY ‘REFLECT’ different specific aspects of the ‘Earth as a simulation’ project. In other words, these separated out EAAS project efforts will still ‘reflect’ and in some cases they will STRONGLY reflect the very specific and unique original research area being carried out. In this ‘particular’ instance, the original ‘research’ that was focused on investigating how to convert many duplicates of subtle people as twins, triplets etc into ‘humans’ while ALSO absolutely trying to keep the FACT that specific sets of ‘unrelated’ humans are actually ‘in fact’ twins, triplicates etc hidden and ‘obscured’. Keep in mind the management needed to do this when ‘spiritual’ literature is littered with entirely obvious references to many subtle beings actually being ‘twins/triplicates’ of each other pretty much everywhere.
In reading quite a few accounts of amazing coincidences I also came across the two below . . .
6a. Morgan Robertson’s 1898 novella ‘Futility’ had many parallels with the RMS Titanic disaster; the book concerned a fictional state-of-the-art ocean liner called Titan, which (like the Titanic) eventually collides with an iceberg on a calm April night whilst en route to New York, with many dying because of the lack of lifeboats. Various other details in the book coincide with the Titanic disaster.
6b. Later, she wrote a book, ‘Beyond the Spectrum’, that described a future war fought with aircraft that carried “sun bombs”. Incredibly powerful, one bomb could destroy a city, erupting in a flash of light that blinds all who look at it. The war begins in December, started by the Japanese with a sneak attack on Hawaii. Does that ‘story’ also seem familiar to you to?
7. In the 19th century, the famous horror writer, Edgar Allan Poe, wrote a book called ‘The narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym’. It was about four survivors of a shipwreck who were in an open boat for many days before they decided to kill and eat the cabin boy whose name was Richard Parker. Some years later, in 1884, the yawl, Mignonette, foundered, with only four survivors, who were in an open boat for many days. Eventually the three senior members of the crew, killed and ate the cabin boy. The name of the cabin boy was Richard Parker.
For anyone that’s read the pages of this series in order, you should be able to rationally explain the two examples above by extending the reasoning just a tad beyond what I’ve already described as likely if we are a simulated duplicated population?
Can you figure it out?
I’ve made a very solid case on the first page for technological developments being slowed down in the simulation so that there is no chance of anyone even starting to think as a simulation designer because they don’t have the technology to run or even test a full scale system. However, this also means that specific events that depended (either directly or indirectly) on specific technologies to be available before they can take place will likely be delayed in people’s time lines (in other words some events will be significantly delayed and end up happening in the future in the simulation (relative to when this event happened within the original population)). However, in simulating people as accurately as possible this means that some people will live through the time when some event, accident or catastrophe that impacted the persona they are simulating originally ‘actually’ happened BUT because of the technology slow down it’s delayed.
Now, for these ‘delayed’ events, despite that in the simulation, they cannot and don’t happen when they actually originally did, it is still highly likely that people simulating someone that was significantly impacted by an event (or because they were a writer and took an interest in this event) such that they wrote about it and had it published. Now the problem is that these people in the technology slowed down simulation despite that this event doesn’t happen when it ACTUALLY SHOULD, they are still likely to find themselves ‘internally’ having ideas about such event and and write a novel or story about these (perhaps even as science fiction). In these cases the novel, the book, the film or computer game will then be written and be published well before the event that these were ACTUALLY ORIGINALLY REALLY ABOUT actually happens.
8. There are similar future event ‘coincidences’ for some of Philip K Dick’s stories too: His book called: “Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said,” which he wrote in 1970, he later met a woman and she and her boyfriend had the same name as the character and the character’s boyfriend. She was the same age and when they met, she was involved in a crime ring just like the character in the book, she was also having an affair with a police officer, which was also like ‘her’ character in the book.
The above is another: A ‘FAKE’ Reality Will ‘Absolutely’ Implement Security Measures’, the designers will have run VR simulations, making it very clear that you absolutely cannot afford to have anyone even starting to think as a FULL copied population, copied reality simulation designer. Unfortunately, this will absolutely happen when the simulated population gets close to having all of the technologies available to put this type of duplicated, copied system together. If your project absolutely requires that you simulate your population through the phase during which the original population designed the simulation they are living within then you have a serious problem because if they start to build what they are in they will realize in the EARLY stages of this that what they are designing will AUTOMATICALLY result in all sorts of: Inherent UNAVOIDABLE Artificial Reality Design Problems: (as listed on this and other pages in this series) that will result in visible ANOMALIES/ARTEFACTS.
On then having a quick look around they will soon become aware that the anomalies that they have deduced will ABSOLUTELY be visible to the population of the simulation they are designing they will become aware that they ALREADY HAVE THESE IN THEIR OWN REALITY.
ERGO/THEREFORE: They will be FORCED to conclude that they are ALREADY living in the same type of copied duplicated simulated reality!!!
For example, if we started to design a system that would involve making copies of ourselves AND which ALSO had this copied population living through the same phase that we designed and built what they are living within then in THINKING about the ‘ramifications’ of this, we would become aware that this simulated population would automatically build the same AGAIN. We would then figure out that they would end up THINKING AS OURSELVES and they to would then figure out that it would be best to slow down technological developments in the simulation to prevent the simulated project population from ever being able to do the same (as we did). However, the OVERRIDING problem is, is that ANYONE thinking like a simulation designer, will figure these things out. They (like me) will become aware of the PROBLEMS of a simulated population designing their own simulation i.e. this will result in many, ‘MANY’ people THINKING LIKE A SIMULATION DESIGNER and each of these people will then become aware of the ‘ramifications’ of ALL SORTS OF LOGICAL POSSIBILITIES, including slowing the technological developments down. They would ALL become aware of the UNAVOIDABLE side effect problems / anomalies of doing VARIOUS THINGS this and they would then become aware that they have the same in their own reality.
They will in fact eventually have you becoming aware that there will be people writing books of specific events that actually then ‘really’ happen in the future. In checking out their own reality they will become aware that THEY HAVE THE SAME SIDE EFFECT PROBLEMS & ANOMALIES that WE DO HAVE HERE. They like use would have EQUIVALENT examples those we have here; 6.7.8, 9A, 10ABCDE, 11, 12, 13 (which I describe in detail both above and below this section).
This is why simulation designers duplicating their own reality and hence THEMSELVES will ABSOLUTELY make the decision to slow down technological developments in the simulation. They will do this because, despite that this will result in yet more anomalies, doing this means that it will be VERY UNLIKELY that anyone in the simulation will start to THINK as a simulation designer (because they won’t ever be able to build the same simulation in their own sub reality).
This is ALSO why anyone designing any system duplicating their own population accurately will ALSO implement extreme ‘security’ management as part of preventing anyone from having access to the information that an artificial reality and or ‘anomaly’ questioning person would need before they even have a chance to even START TO THINK like a SIMULATION DESIGNER.
Such extreme ‘keep your artificial reality safe from discovery safe’ managing ‘security’ efforts would as a ‘priority’ implement measures to:
“Absolutely prevent anyone in ANY TYPE OF ARTIFICIAL REALITY (and particularly one, that is trying to pass itself off as ‘REAL’) from compiling decent foundation information and definitions for the different ‘commoner’ artificial reality types inclusive of our own ‘knowledge’ and experiences of designing and or building these or aspects of these and particularly with respect to any common problems encountered as well the common solutions used to address these problems.”
This is what the designers of ANY TYPE ARTIFICIAL REALITY that is presenting ‘people’ would do, because without access to ‘ANY’ basic information it is impossible for anyone to even BEGIN TO THINK ‘COHERENTLY, OBJECTIVELY or RATIONALLY’ about these possibilities. In other words, it is made ‘impossible’ for anyone to begin to start to ‘THINK’ as A SIMULATION DESIGNER.
However, in actually implementing such ‘EXTREME’ management, this will absolutely result in the presentation of very ‘OBVIOUS’ visible ‘anomalies, artefacts and side effects’ being OBSERVABLE within your fake artificial reality, including:
- NO basic information and common knowledge about any artificial reality are presented ANYWHERE.
- Even more amazing, despite that basic and ‘base’ INFORMATION is all ‘missing’ from everywhere, no one even NOTICES that this is the case.
- This doesn’t stop literally millions of web pages presenting irrational, ‘pie in the sky’, pseudo discussions, because none of them are ever based on any basic information, common knowledge, practical artificial design experiences or definitions any artificial reality type never mind the one ‘allegedly’ being discussed.
- We have been subjected to: ‘PITIFULLY, DIRE RAMBLING, INCOHERENT ‘PSEUDO DISCUSSIONS’ ‘alleging’ to be relevant to: simulation argument, simulated reality and or matrix reality possibilities, when in fact THIS ISN’T THE CASE . . .
- Even worse, this has been the case for over decade (since the ‘simulation argument’ was first presented ) and still ‘NO ONE NOTICES ANY OF THIS’ . . .
Is this what you would expect to have happening in a ‘hypothetical’ real reality?
Now, it’s also known that PKD wrote this book really quickly, in a wave of overriding ‘inspiration’. I’d read of many instances where ‘writers’ seem to be ‘channelling’ the contents of a book or script play or film episode and also when some specific people compose music. Many of them seem to be being directly FED the entire story or music composition as if it’s already PRE-WRITTEN internally. This is of course exactly what is described by some spiritual and many new age people as they write books too.
Would you expect people in a ‘hypothetical’ real reality to be directly FED entire scripts or books? Coincidentally, this is what you would expect to happen in a duplicated system which is trying to keep ‘everything’ unfolding and accurately representing HOW IT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL ENVIRONMENT (or at least how ‘security’ AI’s would ‘want’ certain details or aspects of original events to be ‘depicted’ here to make them ‘less suspicious’).
9A. An ‘X-Files’ episode called “Space” (the 9th episode of season 1 aired on November 12, 1993.) has a Colonel Belt character as a distinguished, well-known astronaut, who is responsible for the safety of a space shuttle mission. In the episode, he insists that the space shuttle will burn up on re-entry because the ’tiles are damaged’. He also is presented as having seen/experienced a ‘being’ or extra-terrestrial in space during a previous mission and that this being attempts to “possess” him and particularly try and make him sabotage the later mission. 13 YEARS after this episode is ‘aired’ the Shuttle Columbia burns up on re-entry because of damaged foam tiles. Also, real-life NASA commander, Clark McClelland whom was responsible for the overall safety of many of NASA missions including apparently the Columbia mission, apparently, not only resembles the ‘Colonel Belt’ actor from the episode but in a statement released on his website McClelland revealed that he witnessed an eight to nine foot tall extraterrestrial in association with a Space Shuttle mission he was monitoring from the Kennedy Space Center. This information wasn’t released to the public until July 2008 (i.e. well after the episode was written and aired).
The space shuttle Columbia disaster resulted in the deaths of 7 people.
If we are living in a simulation attempting to duplicate fairly accurately pretty much everything as it happened in the original reality then this incident will very likely match up ‘accurately’ with such an accident in the original reality. Further more, if we are simulating many duplicated twins people that on duplication will all have exactly the same time line and ‘life experience’ mapped out and presented in the simulation then is it possible that some or all of these people are twins?
If some of those that died in this accident ‘are’ twins then how would a simulation designer handle accidents that involved many twins? How would a simulation designer present multiple accidents involving multiple sets of twins in ways that would minimise suspicion because of the coincidences that would likely be associated with these?
What sleight of hand possibilities would be available to an entirely software defined reality that would allow there to be ENTIRELY ‘obvious’ connections between ‘remote’ apparently disconnected events as well as the people involved with these without these actually being DIRECTLY, OVERTLY obvious? Perhaps the simulation would resort to presenting symbolic or hard to conceptually ‘see’ or ‘appreciate’ connections and or ‘coincidences’ to keep such duplicated events as hidden as possible?
Let’s take a closer look at the space shuttle event and see if there are other ‘coincidences’ specifically related to the ‘PEOPLE’ and their connections that were involved with that event . . .
SUMMARY: So, the shuttle Columbia with a crew of 7, whom are being closely supervised and monitored by another set of people that looking out for them in safety and well being terms and specifically to make sure that they don’t experience any mishaps. It was at the point of entering the atmosphere when it was passing over the Rocky Mountain Range that an explosion of some sort is thought to have occurred, after which communications were lost. In other words it appears as if for the incident, they’d have no time to react or give warning before the shuttle broke up perhaps with their bodies ending up at least briefly either in cold vacuum or the icy cold upper atmosphere . . .
So, a pertinent question here would be:
“Were there any other ‘news’ worthy tragedies/accidents involving 7 people dying on the same day?”
Well,’AMAZINGLY’ . . . . yes there were . . .
9B. There was an serious and ‘bad’ avalanche in the Rockies in the far north, which coincidentally happened in the Province of British Columbia and even more coincidentally it specifically happened in the ‘Columbia’ mountains. Those that died were 7 students from a ‘privileged’ school all on the same ski trip school outing with all of them being closely supervised by adults with a PARTICULAR emphasis on safety, when a number of them were UNEXPECTEDLY caught in a ‘freak’ avalanche that buried the seven that died AND others whom were dug out.
So, in one disaster you’ve a foam tile that likely fractured and broke away from the hull of the shuttle likely resulting in the hull being breached with the bodies likely ending up in very ‘cold’ conditions at least temporarily, while in another you’ve students on a mountain side where a whole section of snow decided to fracture and ‘slip’ away and bury them, again resulting in them being ‘plunged’ into very cold likely ‘oxygen’ deprived conditions.
Both of these accidents could also be described as ‘happening without any significant pre-warning’ i.e. they’d both just ‘suddenly’ and ‘shockingly’ happen with no warning . . .
“Rescuers search on Cheops Mountain after an avalanche engulfed the 17 members of the group from Strathcona-Tweedsmuir School, a private prep school in Calgary, Alberta known widely as STS.”
If you read about and also look at photographs of the 7 students, they come across not only as belonging to a privileged social group, but with uncanny consistency they also appear to be younger versions of the seven astronauts on the space shuttle Columbia.
A quote from the ‘Globe and Mail’: “STS is where “the sons and daughters, nieces and nephews, grandsons and grand-daughters of Calgary’s doctors, lawyers, investment bankers and top executives spend their school days.”
A quote from Michael Anderson: “These young kids were tomorrow’s leaders; they were our astronauts of the future.”
Globe and Mail’s Report on Business, Deborah Yedlin: “And by some weird coincidence, the call letters on the side of Columbia were STS 107. Even if one doesn’t believe in numerology or mysticism, there is no escaping the connection of STS, while the number shows an eerie parallel to the students who were on the trip: 17 students, 10 survived and 7 did not.”
- STS 107: as in the space shuttle Columbia, and a space mission that ended in flames . . . and . . .
- STS 10-7: as in Strathcona-Tweedsmuir School, and a telemark ski trip that ended buried in snow . . .
When business reporters start noticing this kind of thing, then maybe it’s time to take pause.
Coincidentally, two weeks earlier there had been a similar avalanche in the same place that had also resulted in the death of 7 people. AND, there are connections with this group and the company that designed the shuttle fuel tanks and the foam insulation that came away during Columbia’s take-off, damaging its outer skin, and making for one aspect of the re-entry catastrophe of February 1st 2003.
There are many other ‘astounding’ coincidences beyond the above and you can find them on this page here. Because of the detail presented on this page, then I suspect that the writer of this page is simulating someone that was part of the ‘figuring out how to keep hidden’ big and newsworthy events involving many twins living parallel lives.
9C. In noticing the ‘telemark ski trip’ quote, this ‘eventually’ reminded me of a film called the ‘heroes of telemark’ which I vaguely remembered was about people skiing on the top of a mountain as part of some military operation and that some people got killed as part of this. In reading about this in more detail, it was about a military operation called ‘Operation Freshman’, the ‘quote’ below describes this ‘British’ operation that had two aircraft towing two gliders to Norway with the intention of releasing and landing the 2 man gliders so the crews could meet up with Norwegians on the top of a snow covered mountain in winter . . .
“After a period of extensive training, the airborne force took off in two aircraft–glider combinations on the night of 19 November 1942. Both managed to reach the Norwegian coast, but neither was able to reach their objective. The first pair suffered from navigational difficulties and severe weather, which resulted in the tow rope snapping and the first glider crash–landing, with its towing aircraft returning to base; three airborne troops were killed outright, with the survivors captured shortly after the crash. The second pair fared even worse, with both aircraft and glider crashing into a mountain for unknown reasons; the aircrew and some airborne troops were killed outright, and those who survived were taken prisoner. None survived for very long, being executed as a result of Adolf Hitler’s Commando Order, which stated all Commando personnel were to be immediately executed upon capture.”
It appears from the above that there were three people in each aircraft and two in each glider. In that the personnel of two gliders and one aircraft were either killed in a glider or plane crash or executed then this (if correct) indicates that 2+2+3 people i.e. SEVEN people were lost. We have 7 people killed that were part of a dangerous flying ‘operation’ in very cold conditions. In other words, yet again these are also EXCEPTIONALLY EQUIVALENT circumstances compared to both the Columbia shuttle and the school skiing trip disaster . . . . . .
What about some more utterly ‘startling / definitive / impossible’ coincidences? Are there any?
Perhaps like these . . . .
10A. The ‘pilot’ episode of the series, the; ‘Lone Gunmen’ which first aired on March 4, 2001. The ‘Pilot’ was about a government plot to take control of a commercial airliner away from its pilot and remotely control it by electronic means and to then direct it to fly to and then crash into the World Trade Centre and specifically to make it appear as a terrorist plot in order to justify more defence spending. I.e. the specific events/plot of 9/11 were presented as the episode of a TV series six months earlier.
10B. The 2000 conspiracy computer game Deus Ex had the Twin Towers missing in the New York skyline. The real reason for their exclusion had to do with memory constraints, but in the game’s fiction the towers were destroyed by terrorists.
I should also point out that I made a definitive case for a massive invasion of privacy ‘data’ collection on an earlier page in this series, as such the ‘EXCUSE’ event that justified a massive increase in ‘surveillance’ and an invasion of our own privacy is only happening here because it happened in the original population. As such the 9/11 event or its equivalent would have also happened in the original population. However, in the high tech original reality it is highly likely that every aspect of the downing of the twin towers would have been ‘simulated’ and ‘perfected’ well before the original event. You would therefore logically expect that ‘details’ of this VR test run would at least have elements of the 9/11 event presented here as either a film and or a computer game, never mind that it’s also possibly that details or even just rumors (even of security leaks) of the 9/11 possibility or even of the people that were to carry this attack out were ‘leaked’ perhaps even before the event even happened.
10C. There is also an episode of the Simpson’s (Season 9, Episode 1, aired on the 5 Oct. 1997) where Lisa holds up a magazine that reads “New York” at the top which shows a large “9” to the left of the twin towers silhouette. I.e. it’s presenting the characters 9 I I across the page and so obviously reads “911”.
10D. A 1984 comic is pretty much presenting the collapse of the towers in ‘exact’ detail, this illustration on the right was just one of quite a few comics that includes a plane flying into a WTC tower before it actually happened.
10E. How difficult would it be for a reality within which everything is defined by software to ‘synchronize’ one of the biggest most devastating ’emergency’ events ever to happen on a day whose date 9/11 represents the digits used to dial emergency services?
Remind me again . . . what would BORED / CHEEKY / I DON’T AGREE WITH THIS BEING DONE ‘earth as a simulation’ programmers very likely get up to in their spare time?
Isn’t it extremely ‘OBVIOUS’ what some of them ‘obviously’ DID GET UP TO!!!!!
This is yet another problem that you cannot really do much about AT ALL, which is the: Simulation’ Programmers Doing Things that they SHOULDN’T BE DOING ‘PROBLEM”, for massively sophisticated, unbelievably complicated software defining absolutely EVERYTHING, there is no way that you’d be able to check for all possibilities AND particularly for things that will be done by a programmer knowing WHAT THEY ARE UP AGAINST when doing this. These sorts of deliberately anomalous ‘insertions’ would be expected AND as a result the: A ‘FAKE’ Reality Will ‘Absolutely’ Implement Security Measures: would be made even stronger and more effective so that no one would question these.
Coincidentally, despite that for people that are entirely software defined it is not only stupidly easy to fade out specific memories but that this is in fact very likely to be done with respect to information, understandings and explanations that would be entirely ‘WORRYING’ to the simulation software ITSELF. In this respect, you may (or may NOT) perhaps be able to ‘dimly’ recall that I have already explained in detail on a previous page here that the software focused on defining a duplicated copied reality will absolutely ALWAYS, ALREADY KNOW THE FUTURE ABOUT EVERYTHING & EVERYONE, such that it can not only VERY EASILY have accurate details presented about the future, BUT one can predict that it will likely do this as part of ‘facilitating’ its objectives.
One can absolutely deduce that for generally unimportant people, and or unimportant events and encounters the software will allow ‘unimportant’ people generous leeway specifically between IMPORTANT events, meeting and or incidents so that they appear and ‘FEEL’ (and or are MADE TO FEEL) as if they have ‘freewill’. However for extremely important, ‘defining’ events and particularly with respect to specific ‘important’ people that will have a large scale influence on others’ lives (i.e. the decisions they make will impact many, many people) then these specific people will be exceptionally, managed, perhaps even with respect to moment by moment details.
A simulation running duplicated people accurately will then absolutely have an EAAS department dedicated to making sure that the ‘trajectory’ of events are kept on track with respect to the simulation designers’ OVERRIDING objectives and this will particularly be the case with respect to very ‘important’ events and particularly those involving very important ‘key’ people. You would expect anyone here that is simulating someone that worked in this department whom ‘therefore’ specifically spent time and effort pre-defining and pre-choreographing in DETAIL specific important events related to specific ‘important’ people to have exceptionally fine details of their EAAS ‘important people and events’ departments intense work efforts scripted within themselves.
For example if someone worked intensely on making sure that a specific important person got a very specific and very important job/position then this specific person in the simulation will find themselves obsessed with these details. You would expect that this person would either find themselves employed and or working with this important person during the phase that they actually defined this person’s life, perhaps for example as an appointments ‘secretary’ or as this person’s ‘personal’ manager / time keeper or maybe even as a body guard. If it is not possible to have them ‘working’ directly with the person whose script they spent time pre-defining then it is likely that they will write a fiction book, a script for a play or a movie. Such a book, play or movie would then be very likely to present seriously ‘spooky’ details involving the important person and also of specific important events that this specific person pre-defined in minute detail. It is also possible that with the efforts to present parallel lives of split twins ‘out of sequence’ as part of efforts to keep the ‘coincidence’ anomalies due to these as obscured as possible as well as the slowing down technological advances too, that their book, play or movie may ALSO end up being presented BEFORE THAT SPECIFIC IMPORTANT EVENT ACTUALLY REALLY HAPPENED . . .
However, what you can also deduce of an entirely fake reality that is not only managing people with respect to ‘the nature of our reality’ in a fundamental sense BUT in the resulting reality being so utterly compromised, due to it presenting a staggering range of many different as well as VISIBLE; ‘anomalies, oddities, artefacts, coincidences, synchronicity’s as well as other ‘clues” in many cases in ENORMOUS numbers (sympathetic pregnancy for example (multiple millions for some single individual countries)), most of which can with some modest thinking be ‘rationally’ attributed to a specific artificial reality types base configuration (two bodies interfaced together or a ‘full’ everything is software defined simulation), and or then more specifically, to one or more of the following:
- Inherent UNAVOIDABLE Artificial Reality Design Problem: Such as interfacing subtle form to a physical animal form which will very likely result in all sorts of deducible anomalies. Many were described a previous page in the series, including; people feeling ‘subtle being/spirit’ presences, ‘ghost’ sighting, people having near death experiences, spirit ‘possessions’, diagrams and pictures detailing the subtle to physical ‘interfacing’ arrangement. It’s extremely embarrassing that anyone would have to point these types of diagrams out FOR WHAT THEY ‘OBVIOUSLY’ ARE. Unfortunately, since you read that earlier page the managing security efforts have likely already faded away your memories of these OBVIOUS examples? Have they?
- A Simulation Project ‘Conversion’ Decision: Such as converting people that were originally interfaced to hermaphrodite animal forms into either a male or female human despite that this results in the presentation of massive numbers of visible ‘sympathetic pregnancy’ anomalies.
- Simulation Project Agenda and or Project Objective Priority: Such as presenting the entire original asexual, androgynous SUBTLE population as a ‘human’ male or female which then results in an enormous numbers of ‘gender / transgender’ anomalies.
- A ‘FAKE’ Reality Will ‘Absolutely’ Implement Security Measures: In real reality and or an unmanaged fake reality that reality’s academics and scientists would identify, attempt to classify as well as compile a catalogue of ALL anomalies / potential anomalies that they discovered.
For a fake reality and particularly one that is making an effort to PRETEND that it is real that ‘IS’ managing the population then deliberately efforts to identify, record and then classify ‘ALL’ anomalies simply won’t happen. Coincidentally, the human frailty called ‘anomaly blindness, aversion and ‘severe’ misclassification syndrome’, which has over the last 350 years pretty much infected the entire academic and scientific population.
Current estimates indicate an infection rate of 99.999%. Symptoms include:
- A severe aversion to identifying, registering and or even thinking about any anomaly of any type at all AS A REAL ‘ANOMALY’.
- A severe almost paranormal ‘automatic’ immune system like reaction against anyone trying to point out anomalies. In severe cases this can lead to escalating as well as observably ‘irrational’ reactions including ‘outrage’ as well as verbal abuse directed at those not suffering from this syndrome (and particularly those whom are ‘questioning’, are trying to research and understand ‘anomalies’ AS ANOMALIES ‘PROPERLY’),
- They also exhibit an addictive, overriding compulsion to automatically explain ALL types of anomalies away as being due to some type of ‘human frailty’ . . .
- An extreme inability to even become aware of never mind to acknowledge that they are suffering from
‘anomaly blindness, aversion and ‘severe’ misclassification syndrome’extremely aggressive ‘Fake, Anomaly Ridden Reality Security Measures‘.
For example on wikipedia pages describing different aspects of our water molecule, you ‘may’ if you are lucky stumble upon maybe one single anomaly that is actually mentioned. Coincidentally, this page here lists over 70 ‘identified’ water anomalies. Interestingly, on another page here someone manages to do the impossible and convert the incomprehensible ‘science’ descriptions of these anomalies into descriptions that make you aware of the outcome of water HAVING THESE ‘SPECIFIC’ ANOMALIES. These ‘real life descriptions’ then strongly ‘suggest/imply’ that without these specific anomalies ‘life’ on our simulated planet would likely to be extremely limited!!! Coincidentally I’ve also not seen one person manage to conceptually ‘translate’ what is referred to as ‘Intelligent Design’ into what this actually really implies which is that ‘Intelligent Design’ is referring to a ‘designed’ and hence ‘ARTIFICIAL’ reality. Perhaps conceptually miscategorising a simulation designer as a ‘god’ is perhaps another example of the ‘conceptual misdirection’ one would expect to simulation ‘managing software’?
Coincidentally, with a reality that is quite literally ‘bursting at the seams’ in terms of the sheer scale and diversity of ‘anomalies’ it is presenting here, then one of the; ‘Fake Reality Security Measures‘ you can deduce will be implemented is to actually have people directly managed to have them deliberately present FAKE VERSIONS OF ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT ANOMALIES!!
11. For example, managing efforts very likely to ‘persuade’ some people to go out and secretly ‘make’ a few crop circles. The fact that there are obvious and RECORDED differences between ‘home made, eminently fake’ crop circles and the ‘real’ magically ‘materialized’ ones is:
- Documented, while also . . .
- Quite often the fake ones are ‘visually’ obviously fake / of a poorer quality . . .
However, this still doesn’t stop our simulation’s security software from then making sure that the fake crop circles are used to try and convince the majority of the rest of population that ALL CROP CIRCLES ARE ‘THEREFORE’ FAKE / HOME MADE.
I should also point out something else that is quite obvious here, in that many crop circle designs are often exceptionally complicated and sophisticated, some even have ‘information’ coded into the designs. In other words, the EAAS programmers that spent significant amounts of their ‘spare’ time thinking about and ‘conceptually’ making these up, would also have spent time ‘coding’ these as part of having these designs ‘made to manifest’ in the simulation. In this respect, it is ‘therefore’ not unreasonable for the simulation security software to HAVE THE SAME PEOPLE simulated as doing the ‘equivalent’ here by having them attempt to visibly and physically make crop circles (as this would reflect their effort to generate crop circles in their script). So, you can in this instance deduce that it is highly likely that the same people will try and make at least some ‘real’ crop circles here BUT do this very badly because it’ll be much harder in practical terms to make them by hand rather than by getting the simulation software to make them ‘magically’.
12. The video immediately below is a good example of someone making up ‘FAKE’ ANOMALIES. Having the below presented on any ‘SERIOUS’ never mind ‘reasoned’ page would be used by the simulation software to cast aspersions on EVERYTHING ELSE presented on the same page as well as perhaps even this entire web site.
So, the below is an excellent example of simulation security software efforts to ‘muddy the waters’ and particularly with respect to people trying to understand and figure out the ‘REAL’ anomalies.
13. Despite that the ‘Simpsons’ actually did predict ‘Trump’s’ presidency the above video was made AFTER Trump was elected, even worse, it not only presents way more ‘coincidences’ compared to the original Simpsons series, BUT, it doesn’t mention that it’s a SPOOF, MADE UP FAKE EFFORT either . . .
Below is a video of 10 future predictions the ‘Simpsons’ series actually did ‘really’ make . . .
Below are a few more very, very odd coincidences . . .
14A. On February 13, 1746, a Frenchman, Jean Marie Dubarry, was executed for the murder of his father. Precisely 100 years later, on February 13, 1846, another Frenchman, also named Jean Marie Dubarry, was executed – for the murder of his father.
14B. We have same named single survivor of ship sinking incidents spread out over almost 300 years . . .
On December 5th 1660, a ship sank in the straights of Dover – the only survivor was noted to be Hugh Williams.
On 5th December 1767, another ship sank in the same waters – 127 lost their lives, the only survivor was noted to be Hugh Williams.
On 8th August 1820, a picnic boat capsized on the Thames – there was one survivor – Hugh Williams.
On 10th July 1940, a British trawler was destroyed by a German mine – only two men survived, one man and his nephew – they were both called Hugh Williams.
One of the things that has puzzled me is how would the simulation designers get accurate information about ‘everyone’ throughout their entire history? They would perhaps only have very accurate details of more recent events and people. Depending on the project, they may actually be mixing in some specific incidents/events from a lot of people’s later lives into their earlier incarnations. This would result in certain events involving the same incarnated person appearing to be repeating!!!
Can you think of any other ‘serious’ problems that slowing down technological advances in the simulation will cause the simulation designers?
Well what about all of the fiction and or social commentary and or criticism that would ‘naturally’ include or even be about advanced technologies because they were a normal and integral part of the original culture being simulated? For a simulation ‘seriously’ slowing down technological advances, (Remember Leonardo Da Vinci was LIKELY researching ‘everything’ as part of putting together a realistic simulation 500 years ago) then you would expect many stark examples of people writing about seriously advanced technologies that we don’t have here AND they will often be writing about them even perhaps before scientists became aware of such possibilities.
How are you going to get around this ‘stark’ problem? Well, any decent simulation designer is going to shift all ‘writing’ of advanced technologies sideways and perhaps call it something like ‘science fiction’.
15. Seeing as I have already presented a VERY ‘strong’ case above that we are perhaps simulating MANY people here that were originally hermaphrodites, PLUS, for those of you that are observant, you will already have noticed that we don’t actually have any significant LARGE hermaphrodite species here AT ALL. In which case, it is perhaps not impossible that someone in the original population would have written something quite substantial about an intelligent hermaphrodite species perhaps even as an ‘alien’ species?
In that I have also already made a strong case that the people whom designed our simulation are more likely than not to A) be human (i.e. be using the human physical body form to interface their subtle population to preferentially) and or have a strong preference for the ‘human’ animal species in particular . . . while it is also very likely that B) they DON’T LIKE and or have an aversion to or reaction against hermaphrodite species, and this is despite that this is also the most logical physical species form to use to interface an asexual androgynous subtle being to.
Both of the above are somewhat ‘obvious’ because our likely ‘human’ simulation designers seem to have converted all ‘intelligent’ animals (i.e. subtle ‘beings’ whom were interfaced to a physical form) specifically into physical humans within our duplicated ‘EVERYTHING’ simulation here.
In this respect, it is perhaps not only possible, but actually LIKELY that we might just have some science fiction presented here that would be about humans and hermaphrodites being against each other. They may even perhaps be fighting each other, while all being written in ‘unbelievably REALISTIC’ and VERY FINE detail that would be typical of someone ‘documenting’ REAL EVENTS?
Coincidentally, a book trilogy called the ‘Enemy Papers’ by Barry B Longyear are of very detailed ‘stories’ covering exactly the circumstances that I describe!!! Well, obviously that’s just another of those random coincidences rather than the outcome of applying some very logical and reasoned thinking to explain some of the enormous numbers of anomalies we have presented here by using some foundation basics of different artificial reality types as a starting point for some rational and ‘objective’ reasoning!!!