Cultcow Brad Watson / Richard Bradshaw Watson / Brad Watson_Miami - Jesus & Albert Einstein reincarnated, discoverer of GOD=7_4 Theory

[Brad Watson_Miami]

@Jan_Hus , @Flowers For Sonichu , & everyone,

The Templar Code is currently on History Channel. I've seen this several times before. On Friday the 13th October 1307, the Templars were rounded up by King Phillip IV and his puppet Pope primarily in France and England. Many of them escaped to Switzerland and Scotland. Jaques de Molay was the Grand Master and he was burned at the stake in Paris across from Notre Dame.

Knights Templar changed their name to Knights of Christ.

"There can't be no coincidence."​

In 1306, the Pope excommunicated Bruce and Scotland from the Church.

Rossyln Chapel was a center for learning and the Sinclairs became head of underground Templars.

After 150 years, in 1314, the Knights Templar disappear fom the historical records. Almost all of their records were burned.

Is there Templar treasure buried in Oak Island, Nova Scotia.

Masonic guilds have intentionally blurred the lines between the Templars and Freemasonry.

@Kartoffel and everyone,

If I delete "points" from the equation, are you good with it now? Please choose (A) written with "points" or (B) written without.

Theory of Luck Equation
Luck 100 = [karma 4 + modesty 1] x [desire 4 + actions 4 + abilities 4 + contibutions 4 + blessings 4]​

 

[Kartoffel]

"There can't be no coincidence."

It's logic time!​

There can't be no conincidence is equal there can be a coincidence.
Although this insight itself isn't one, you actually stated that there has to be coincidences. And did nowhere afterwards state that you consider this quote as untrue.
If you want a more detailed explanation why two negations of a statement evaluate too true I'll be happy to point you in the right directions.

 

[Brad Watson_Miami]

Behind the Da Vinci Code is now on History Channel.

It's logic time!​

"There can't be no conincidence" is equal there can be a coincidence.
Although this insight itself isn't one, you actually stated that there has to be coincidences. And did nowhere afterwards state that you consider this quote as untrue. If you want a more detailed explanation why two negations of a statement evaluate too true I'll be happy to point you in the right directions.

You're right. Some guy said that incorrectly on the History Channel program and I quoted him. He should have said, "This can't be coincidence" or "There Are No Coincidences", but he fucked up!

Agreed?

Did Jesus marry Mary? Did Jesus marry Mary?... Hum... If there was only a clue... Did Jesus marry Mary?... Hey! Wait a minute! Marry Mary?! Is that a HUGE Code within the English language?! Yes.

 

[Kartoffel]

@Kartoffel ,

If I delete "points" fom the equation, are you good with it now? If so, please explain why this is important. I'll read your last post again.

Theory of Luck Equation
Luck 100 = [karma 4 + modesty 1] x [desire 4 + actions 4 + abilities 4 + contibutions 4 + blessings 4]​

Well, it's correct now in the basic level considering that the right and left side evaluate to the same unit, BUT now you have no units at all. The only time you don't have to use a unit is when you have a number of something, but that can be only used if you have something that is actually countable.
Of course I'll invite you to explain me what "one luck" exactely means. I myself consider luck for nothing that is quantifyable without some kind of reference point, like for example money and water. Only by the addition of units like (dollars or liters) they become quantifiable.
Also what exactly does luck mean to you? I consider myself for example lucky when I get a good grade in one of my courses, but that is always the result of hard and dedicated work and not a product of chance or a genorousity of the universe per se, but a fitting outcome.
Please explain each of your variables and what excatly "one unit" of each of these quantifies.

You're right. Some guy said that incorrectly on the History Channel program and I quoted him. He should have said, "This can't be coincidence" or "There Are No Coincidences", but he fucked up!

Agreed?

If you want to use a quote you disagree with you actually need to voice your disagreement immediatly, respective call out the error, otherwise any reader will read it as something you consider true. Because sarcasm has no place in a scientific theory whatsoever (even when the topic is sarcasm itself, you can talk about it and show uses of it, but you can't actually use it).

 

[Brad Watson_Miami]

Behind the Da Vinci Code is now on History Channel. The book Holy Blood, Holy Grail and its authors Richard Tebing and Henry Lincoln.

"The Holy Grail was a medeval invention; it's not in the Bible. The Knights Templar protected the Holy Grail: the information of Jesus and Mary Magdalen being married and having a child with royal descendents.

 

[RomanesEuntDomus]

Did Jesus marry Mary? Did Jesus marry Mary?... Hum... If there was only a clue... Did Jesus marry Mary?... Hey! Wait a minute! Marry Mary?! Is that a HUGE Code within the English language?! Yes.

That's quite a stretch, even by your standards, Brad.

 

[Brad Watson_Miami]

Well, it's correct now in the basic level considering that the right and left side evaluate to the same unit, BUT now you have no units at all. The only time you don't have to use a unit is when you have a number of something, but that can be only used if you have something that is actually countable.
Of course I'll invite you to explain me what "one luck" exactely means. I myself consider luck for nothing that is quantifyable without some kind of reference point, like for example money and water. Only by the addition of units like (dollars or liters) they become quantifiable.

Ok, we've been through this before. Explain to me what one point means in football? How about a test where when you get everything right, you get a 100?

Also what exactly does luck mean to you?

I use the dictionary definition; I always do although I sometimes add to it or correct a mistake.

I consider myself for example lucky when I get a good grade in one of my courses, but that is always the result of hard and dedicated work and not a product of chance or a genorousity of the universe per se, but a fitting outcome.

"A good grade in one of my courses" is not that good of an example where luck is involved. Do you play golf? Golf is an excellent example where luck is very involved!

Please explain each of your variables and what excatly "one unit" of each of these quantifies.

See the dictionary definitions of luck, karma, modesty, desire, actions, abilities, contributions, blessings.

The points system of the equation shows ratios. The 100 points is equivalent to 100%: 100 percentage points. I thought that was obvious.

If you want to use a quote you disagree with you actually need to voice your disagreement immediatly, respective call out the error, otherwise any reader will read it as something you consider true.

I wrote down what the guy said in real time and I think I got it right. He misstated his point and whoever produced that History Channel program also fucked up by not catching it.

Yes, we've now corrected it. There Are No Coincidences.

Because sarcasm has no place in a scientific theory whatsoever (even when the topic is sarcasm itself, you can talk about it and show uses of it, but you can't actually use it).

Agreed. Where did I ever "use sarcasm in a scientific theory"?

Behind the Da Vinci Code is now on History Channel. The book Holy Blood, Holy Grail and its authors Richard Tebing and Henry Lincoln.

"The Holy Grail was a medeval invention; it's not in the Bible. The Knights Templar protected the Holy Grail: the information of Jesus and Mary Magdalen being married and having a child with royal descendents.

"As Above, So Below"​

Churches in Rennes-le-Chateau, France form a pentacle which was the symbol of Mary Magdalen. There's also sacred geometry and a pentacle formed on Bornholm Island with 15 medeval churches (800 years ago) - 4 are round.

@RomanesEuntDomus,

Had you ever thought about did Jesus Marry Mary before?

 

[Kartoffel]

Ok, we've been through this before. Explain to me what one point means in football? How about a test where when you get everything right, you get a 100?

That's easy. In a test you solition is compared to the expected solution and you recieve points according to how much it measures up. Often it is that there are predifined parts that score as a whole if right and not at all if something in it is wrong. But as the American system is in huge favour of multiple choice tests (as far as I know )the meaning is even more clear; because the points align up to the choices. Right choice you get them, wrong choice not.

A point in football (or any real sport) is the fulfillment of clearly specified conditions as the rules of that sport specify.

So in both cases there are distinct meanings of "points" that can be assessed and measured.

I use the dictionary definition; I always do although I sometimes add to it or correct a mistake.

You are only allowed to use a definition someone else made for your own work if you cite the source. Otherwise you automaticly claim it as your own definition. The only time you may leave out definitions of something is when you talk about something that is something established in your field and considered basic knowledge - if you talk about a clearly advanced topic. If you do establish the groundwork, then you have to define everything.

"A good grade in one of my courses" is not that good of an example where luck is involved. Do you play golf? Golf is an excellent example where luck is very involved!

Well your are wrong in your statement, it's an perfect example for the fact that not everyone defines luck the same way, so you actually strenghened my argumentative point. You need to define your variables or otherwise people can read stuff into it you did not intend. AND they won't be wrong.

See the dictionary definitions of luck, karma, modesty, desire, actions, abilities, contributions, blessings.

I can't, because - believe it or not - there is more than on dictionary out there in the world. As long as you don't which declare which dictionary (which includes date of publishing, authors, publisher etc.) your definition is from I have no way to access to them at all. Basically that means that dictionary definitions have to be cited, too. And if you ever looked in a style guide you'll notice that there are rules for citing dictionaries.

The points system of the equation shows ratios. The 100 points is equivalent to 100%. I thought that was obvious.

No it isn't just because you deem something obvious it isn't automatically true. You have to state such things explecitely.

Also how can you have something like luck as a percentile, when you never specified what 100 percent of luck amount to?

I wrote down what the guy said in real time and I think I got it right. He misstated his point and whoever produced that History Channel program also fucked up by not catching it.

Yes, we've now corrected it. There Are No Coincidences.

Agreed. Where did I ever "use sarcasm in a scientific theory"?

You are never sarcastic when you state something about a theory? Very good, that means from no one everytime you state something in relation to your theories we can assume that you ment it 100% honest (like in not sarcastic at all). So please be careful what you write because you won't be able to fall back on "just joking" or the like.

 

[RomanesEuntDomus]

@RomanesEuntDomus,

Had you ever thought about did Jesus Marry Mary before?

That is by no means a new thought. The earliest (verifiable) examples of such ideas might be the Gnosis and the latest incredibly popular thing to throw that idea around was A very popular Tom Hanks movie based on a very popular Dan Brown Book.

No, the idea whether or not Jesus married her is not what I am talking about. I am talking about you doing such a childish thing as remarking that her name is close to the term "to marry" and then think this is by some means a) a new idea and b) totally super secret and it needed a reincarnated Einstein to crack that "subtle code".

 

[Brad Watson_Miami]

Angels and Demons Decoded is now on History Channel.

CERN near Geneva, Switzerland. Inventors of the worldwide-web.

 

[buffaloWildWings]

"As Above, So Below"​

Why do you keep talking about the Templars, when they were heretics who worshiped Baphomet?
"As Above, So Below" is directly linked to occult beliefs and demons from the netherworld.

 

[RomanesEuntDomus]

"A good grade in one of my courses" is not that good of an example where luck is involved. Do you play golf? Golf is an excellent example where luck is very involved!

Only when you're a shitty golfer that can't propperly control his swing and where his ball flies off to.
In such a case you'd have to rely on coincidences (ie: luck) to make the ball land on the green.

 

[Brad Watson_Miami]

"You loved Brad, nothing could replace Brad." - Liberty Mutual ad on History Ch 10:12

Why do you keep talking about the Templars, when they were heretics who worshiped Baphomet? "As Above, So Below" is directly linked to occult beliefs and demons from the netherworld.

Slap yourself and then WAKE UP in the 21st century! The Templars were declared heretics by those - King Phillip IV and his puppet pope - who then didn't have to repay them large amounts of money that they had borrowed from them. The Templars did NOT worship Baphomet, but if your foot is set on fire, you might say you did!

Jesus son of Joseph was a heretic. Everyone who believes that this Universe and Earth is much older than 6,000 years is considered a heretic. Same thing with evolutionists, etc.

Y'shua referred to "As Above, So Below" in the Lord's Prayer when he said, "On Earth as it is in the heavens". (This is almost always mistranslated as "On Earth as it is in heaven."


Synchronism: 10:17 "The Cardinals are locked in the Sistine Chapel for Conclave... Pope John Paul I may have been murdered for trying to eliminate Freemasonry from the Vatican."

 

[YankeeTrader]

Why do you keep talking about the Templars, when they were heretics who worshiped Baphomet?
"As Above, So Below" is directly linked to occult beliefs and demons from the netherworld.

Because Brad is dumb as a post.

 

[buffaloWildWings]

Slap yourself and then WAKE UP in the 21st century! The Templars were declared heretics by those - King Phillip IV and his puppet pope - who then didn't have to repay them large amounts of money that they had borrowed from them. The Templars did NOT worship Baphomet, but if you're foot is set on fire, you might say you did!

Jesus son of Joseph was a heretic. Everyone who believes that this Universe and Earth is much older than 6,000 years is considered a heretic. Same thing with evolutionists, etc.

Y'shua referred to "As Above, So Below" in the Lord's Prayer when he said, "On Earth as it is in the heavens". (This is almost always mistranslated as "On Earth as it is in heaven."


Synchronism: 10:17 "The Cardinals are locked in the Sistine Chapel for Conclave... Pope John Paul I may have been murdered for trying to eliminate Freemasonry from the Vatican."

"As Above, So Below" originates from the alchemist text known as the Emerald Tablet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald_Tablet

 

[Kartoffel]

That is by no means a new thought. The earliest (verifiable) examples of such ideas might be the Gnosis and the latest incredibly popular thing to throw that idea around was A very popular Tom Hanks movie based on a very popular Dan Brown Book.

No, the idea whether or not Jesus married her is not what I am talking about. I am talking about you doing such a childish thing as remarking that her name is close to the term "to marry" and then think this is by some means a) a new idea and b) totally super secret and it needed a reincarnated Einstein to crack that "subtle code".

By the same logic I'll propose:
- "Mary had a little lamb" is a popular folksong
- Jesus is also called "God's lamb"
- Jesus is the son of god who became human
- Jesus was Mary's son
- Lambs where popular choices as a sacrifice in old times
- Sacrificing humans is in our culture most often attributed to be a satanistic practice

If Mary "had" that lamb (past tense) then it means she now hasn't it any more. Chances are high, that she sacrificed it. Because Jesus was the lamb (as indicated by the whole crib thing) and was human, Mary has to be therefore a Satanist.
As a son of a Satanist your chances are high that your parent stupped Satan, because that's what real Satanists love to to, if you can believe common cheap horror movies trustworthy documentations. So, Jesus was the son of Satan, also commonly known as the Antichrist.

So to make it short: Jesus Christus is the Antichrist.

Welcome to the club, buddy, you can get your free kiwitini at the pool.

 

[ChurchOfGodBear]

Mmmmm... lamb.

 

[Brad Watson_Miami]

Angels and Demons Decoded is now on History Channel.

CERN near Geneva, Switzerland. Inventors of the worldwide-web.

Galileo is a BIG focus of this book/movie and this HC program.

 

[YankeeTrader]

@ChurchOfGodBear When I roll to the range today, I'll be sure to load the magazines with 7 rounds each and go through 4 rotations with each weapon. Add some semi-auto data into his theories.

I wonder if he's researched any ballistics data for 7_4 connections?

 

[Brad Watson_Miami]

@Kartoffel,

In my 74-page booklet, There Are No Coincidences, I define the terms of the Theory of Luck Equation. I'll ty to find the latest copy of that. There is no dictionary source for the terms; there's not enough room for it on the page and the theory is restricted to only one page in that booklet.