Tsk, tsk, tsk. You show your shallow and sloppy thinking yet again, Peter:
It was obviously a prediction. The first people who saw and commented on that post all understood it to be a prediction.
Did you read what I wrote? I said I want
proof and validation that it was a prediction. I did not say I would be happy if you told me that a gaggle of people
presumed (essentially GUESSED) that it was a prediction. I know the answer to this could very well be "no" for you, but: Do you understand the difference between guessing/presuming and proof/validation?
All the above six people who commented on this in the days immediately before and after JPII's demise were viewing it as a definite prediction of the date of the Pope's death.
So if six people look up in the sky & view something they do not understand as a "definite UFO" does that (a) actually MAKE it a UFO and/or (b) PROVE that it was a UFO?
No. I didn't think so. Just how dense do you wish to portrary yourself, here, Peter?
That means there was a majority consensus opinion regarding this in the beginning
Science does not work by "majority consensus opinion" to determine reality. They rely on facts, not guesses and presumption.
But really, Ray, what would your argument be anyway?
Now I am going to do something that you NEVER do: Answer ALL your questions. Just to PROVE TO YOU that this is YOUR interpretation (and a presumption by the others), I can easily give you MY interpretation, which is just as reasonable as your presumption.
1) The original post was entered (by the adjustment applied to my Pacific Time Zone) on "03/03/05 at 05:24PM". So that "05:24PM" is reporting the Pacific Time Zone time when the post was entered on the server.
2) I can PRESUME that since Zeshua was saying "we are in real time" and further that she told us she was posting from the UK, that when the date/time is "03/03/05 5:24PM" in California, that the date/time in the UK (being right on GMT which is 8 hours ahead of California time) would be "03/04/05 1:24AM" GMT.
3) So now, with these presumptions, I could look at Zeshua's last point in her post of "03/04/05" as being nothing more than her documentation of the "real time" date upon which she was making this, the first post in that thread.
4) As it has been CLEARLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY pointed out in the past: The Pope's ACTUAL, certified date of death was the 2nd of April, 2005. That means it is NOT A FACT that the Pope died on the 3rd of April. You must "interpret" it this way by forcing you to correct for an ARBITRARY timezone, rather than the time zone in which the death was certified.
5) Clearly it is and would be silly for a doctor in Italy to say "Oh, well, it is already the 3rd of April in Australia, so I guess I will mark the death certificate with that date." No, since the death took place in Italy's time zone, it must (BY LAW!) be marked with the time and date that the death occurred WHERE IT OCCURED.
So we see, you must actually "interpret" outside of what the laws state for certification of death! How effed up are you for doing that????
There. I answered your question about what my argument would be. Of course, you will not accept it, but it does not matter if you accept it. My argument is at least EQUALLY plausible to your interpretation...and moreover, you still have not given me ANY PROOF that it was a "prediction".
That it wasn't really a prediction, but it was just an incredibly lucky coincidence that (A) it just happened to look like a prediction, and (B) it turned out to be an incredibly successful lookalike?
It only "looks like a prediction" because you want it to. It certainly does NOT look like a prediction if you view it in the alternate way I have just presented to you. Again, you can tell me my alternate view is "incorrect" but that is only your opinion...which is not worth much at all given your weak mind.
Your argument then would boil down to "Zeshua is just incredibly lucky"? Not much of an argument there, Ray.
And now Samael is presuming to tell me what MY argument is/will be? No, I am not even saying Zeshua got incredibly lucky. I am saying that she was a hoaxer, and was not even TRYING to predict the date. Rather she was documenting the date she started that thread and asked what would happen if the pope dies. Furthermore, YOU FORCE HER TO BE LUCKY by re-interpreting the date of the death of the pope to be OUTSIDE the time zone where he actually expired!
Okay, now quit stalling. Go ahead and pick a date out of your magic hat for Kim Jong Il (maybe those deities you invoke for your curses will tell you). Don't worry about specifying if you're using American or European date formatting, nor if you're looking at it from east or west of the IDL. That way your one set of numbers will give you four possible hits, just the way they did for Zeshua.
Go ahead, Ray. I bet you can't do it in a hundred tries.
I told you what the precondition is before I give you my prediction of Kim Jong Il's death date. You can either provide me the proof that it was a prediction, or you can keep soiling yourself and running off at the mouth trying to force-fit this even more. But no amount of your presuming, or telling me how much I might get the date wrong will not bully me into doing anything until you meet MY conditions.
Again, do you want me to write a post recapping ALL the gauntlets I put before you...and ignored? there are a lot...and yes, I have been keeping score!
RMT
