An epiphany on parallels

Parallels are not an easy topic to discuss or defend. It “seems” plausible, but still, it’s pretty Sci-Fi or “out there.” Yeah, I know about Physics and string theory, but there is no way I can understand the math of it. So, validating it is a whole ‘nother thing.  A couple of my chat buddies on TLE have experienced profound events, where fountains suddenly appear in their neighborhoods, or major changes to housing appear, etc. I trust them enough to believe they’re not making shit up. But, still, it’s difficult to really accept parallels without some tangible proof of some sort. I think I’ve just found the proof.

I’ve been following various conspiracy theories off and on now for a few years. Recently, I became much more interested in the spread of “trutherisms” into a much wider range of skepticism. I’ve set up a Google Alert for my daily dose of “truther.” What on earth are these people drinking? Truther was a term that originally was assigned for all of those various theories about 9/11. It has since evolved to denote any sizable movement that attempts to debunk standard interpretation of events.

The most recent one would be the Sandy Hook killings Connecticut. My initial impression was “WHAT THE FUCK??!!”  What is wrong with our society that the most simple and straightforward of events can be manipulated and attached to all sorts of weird theories? Well, I think I’ve figured out what it is.

But, first take a look at this website and video: Sandy Hook Hoax: Second Video Released by Truthers with More Controversial Viewpoints [Watch]. I was diddling along, only slightly tuned in when all of the information was being proven by DATES. Websites that had been created before the event, some of them up to 4 days before.  Some of them within a few hours in advance of the event. All tell essentially the same story, but the timing is way off.

All of a sudden, I understood. What we’re seeing is a graphic representation of at least six different parallels that have managed to be tracked on the internet via webpages.  These “truthers” have a legitimate set of questions, only they’re grappling with something beyond their understanding, which in turn, is causing some of them to come up with outlandish conclusions.

I’m beginning to think that the growth of trutherisms on the internet is not entirely happening due to those involved being “crackpots” or people so paranoid that they cannot trust the government, etc. While this IS a strong aspect, it’s not the only driver. I think we’re glimpsing the crisscross of extremely close parallels, all of which are connected to the internet, which leaves evidence.

Take a look and see if you agree that this might be plausible.

7 comments to An epiphany on parallels

  • Jana

    Geraldine, that is absolutely fascinating. I had no idea about the dates discrepancy. When I have googled “sandy hook 10th december”, I got loads of results about this back. I would love to ask Michael whether you got it right.

  • Maureen

    Geraldine — I just finished the video and my head is swimming. What does one believe? If it is multiple Parallels in action — everyone is right!! You can see how people try to “fill in the blanks” with fiction when they can’t work out exactly what the truth is. I’m sure we all do it to some degree — it’s just how our minds work — no one’s to blame.

    Facts colliding with fiction — what a bloody mess! I’m still scratching my head. You really should ask Michael about this.

  • I have a TeamTLE POF on Monday a.m. — I guess Project is gonna get back-burnered. :)

  • Bobby

    Geraldine, I think these sort of things happen often. I remember this one back from the 9/11 days wonder just what really was going on with this:

  • I looked at that, Bobby. Maybe we’re dealing with manifested precognition or even “time storms.” I will definitely be following up on this come Monday.

  • I was able to ask Michael about this theory, and received an equivocal answer. Troy was very under the weather with a cold; so, I might reask from a different perspective; however, here is the answer for now.

    [GeraldineB] I would like to ask “how is it possible” for multiple websites to be created about Sandy Hook but before the Sandy Hook date, Dec 14, 2013. There are at least six different websites that were created about Sandy Hook before the event occurred on the 14th.

    [MEntity] As far as we can see, this is a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of familiar, faulty algorithms that occur in the dating of materials for the Internet.

    [MEntity] This anomaly appears to be the case for any number of reasons, but it is not unusual for documents used for later content remain with the date/time that the original document was created, and not the publication or population of the content.

    [MEntity] In addition to this, dates of publication or creation can be altered quite easily.

    [GeraldineB] Deliberate hoax?

    [GeraldineB] I have speculated that the internet might be subject to various parallels

    [MEntity] Though this event is not completely accessible to us, from what we can see, most of the anomalies appear to have been generated from replacement of content within prior created documents.

    [MEntity] We would not, necessarily, consider this a hoax, nor that the event in question, itself, was a hoax or conspiracy.

    [GeraldineB] You mean an existing posting was altered after the fact to something “more recent”?

    [MEntity] As for anomalies regarding parallel shifts, we have never seen static evidence of any anomalies beyond memory.

    [MEntity] That is a fairly accurate understanding, Geraldine. To clarify: if one were to create a (literal) template on a certain date, but publish it on another, the creation date can remain as the reference, even after publication. It is not unusual for the creation of templates for use in later purposes.

    [MEntity] Beyond that understanding, there are also mistakes in algorithms that might generate inaccurate dates for numerous reasons.

    [MEntity] With that in mind, that is exactly how parallel shift anomalies integrate so seamlessly.

    [MEntity] There is always an “explanation.”

    [GeraldineB] Oh so it could be parallels, but with an “explanation”

    [MEntity] There would, without question, be parallels generated from such an explosive event that involved so many variables and fragments.

    I’ve never heard of websites being “misdated” before. But, I will investigate that.

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>