I am unable to read comments in Internet Explorer (IE) because google chrome have made alterations to the blog. I can still read them through firefox and, of course, chrome - but I don't like chrome because I can't have my norton identity-safe toobar. I'm not used to firefox although I could do I suppose.
I have opened up another blog at http://besslerswheel.wordpress.com/ but I'm not sure whether to abandon this one or stay. I can of course use chrome but I object to the way they've done this, and I am not alone.
Can people still comment here? Try and let me know, should I stay or should I go?
JC
A blog about Johann Bessler and the Orffyreus Code and my efforts to decipher it. I'll comment on things connected with it and anything I think might be of interest to anyone else.
The ‘Bessler’s Books’ button at the top of the right side panel, will take you to a page giving access to all Bessler’s books. Simply click ‘home’ to come back to my blog.
Note the copyright notice.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Code contained in the Orffyrean Declaration of Faith - Part Four
SKILLED CODEBREAKER NEEDED! Do you have the skills to decipher a 300 hundred year old code which could revolutionise the way we produce ch...
Hi John, as far as I can see, it still works. I use Firefox (running on OpenSuse 11.4). Are you sure this is not simply a Micro$oft "feature" (MS-euphemism for bugs)?
ReplyDeleteI did notice, a few days ago, changed fonts in posts.
I also notice that we can now reply on posts, as I have done here on my own post. Some things have been changed by Google, apparently.
DeleteThanks for resaponding,Andre, I still can't read comments in IE but at least I an see that there have been comments, so just open firefox and then I can read and respond.
ReplyDeleteJC
I've placed a link to the Remote Viewing report done for me in 2008, in red just under the countdown clock.
ReplyDeleteJC
I am using Firefox and have no problems. This new format is way better than the old one. Why don't you switch to Firefox or Chrome? Or just send an email to blogspot and tell them the situation ? BTW reports are somewhat interesting. Yellow and sticky substance? What is that?
ReplyDeleteI think I'll probably cancel the other blog - I'm getting used to chrome and firefox now!
ReplyDeleteJC
Good! JC, I don't have any problems in IE either. Which version are you using? What is your OS?
DeleteWell one OS is vista and the other is XP so I can't use IE9!
DeleteJC
I think some other blog owners have the same problem; http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/blogger/thread?tid=02e27068c9eeedf1&hl=en I think Google will fix the issue soon.
Delete@ JC
ReplyDeleteHow truly sad. This used to be a fun place to visit and opine on. Now it's become a effort to read and post on. Hopefully, Google can correct the problem. As for your wordpress blog, I tried to leave a test comment there and couldn't do it!
I, too, am impressed with the remote viewer who "saw" the unfinished windmill with the body that fell from it. That's TOO much of a coincidence to be a coincidence!
When Bessler fell to his death from that building in 1745, he must have charged its structures up with iis mind's psychic energies and they are STILL lingering there!
I would like to have some psychometrists visit the structure and see if they could read any impressions off of its outer or inner walls. Then see if they can describe the inner structures of his wheels. THAT experiment might prove VERY interesting!
John, my comments after a quick look at the remote viewing material:
ReplyDeleteThe "Tasking" i.e. the question, (not given to the viewers) is good.
In the Report Summary, Viewer "R" noted "wavy," "wavy pattern," "natural source of pulsating energy," etc. Also about halfway down in the Detailed Reports "vibrating, shaking, trembling" is mentioned. Again, to me, these remarks suggest oscillation.
From my (non-expert) understanding of remote viewing, if you felt it was worth pursuing this with any further sessions, the viewers should be asked to concentrate on a list of just a few aspects which you would deem to be worth another look. Those remarks above, suggesting oscillation, would be my contribution to such a list.
Arktos, I completely agree. I read the RV reports too and I found them quite interesting, especially the points you also mention. As Techno stated: too much of a coincidence! I've long believed that oscillation is the key to Bessler's secret, and this certainly points in that direction.
DeleteIf I can help in any way, financially or otherwise, to make this happen, count me in.
I'm writing to the Rv organiser now that I have had his permission to publish his report and he has asked for the links to any discussion on it, so perhaps we'll get some direct response here or at the Besslerwheel forum.
ReplyDeleteJC
Fopget the other blog, I've deleted it. I'll stick with this one :-)
ReplyDeleteJC
Maybe the connectedness principle is the yellow sticky thing :) Maybe somehow the weights stick to the rim...I don't know...
ReplyDeleteCould be, I really don't know what to make of it. Some scans seem way off the mark, others intriguing and a few really interesting! The Rv organiser has offered to do another one if I can come up with something with a better chance of validation.
ReplyDeleteJC
Hello ,testing,testing,..Yes Google chrome really works.
ReplyDeleteThanks Trevor, glad to know you're still with us!
ReplyDeleteJC
Some more comments and (numbered) questions after closer study of the RV report summary and the first two detailed reports:
ReplyDeleteMost viewers refer to "heat". According to Alfred Evert's account of his Bessler wheel RV sessions, "Jelinski does know by experiences, viewers often describe energy by terms of 'hot' or 'heat'."
In the Report Summary:
Viewer R says under "The energetic is:-" "It rises, then levels out or floats."
Q1: Does it rise - at constant speed? - or decelerating? - or first accelerating then decelerating?
(I have a reason for asking that, but don't want to contaminate anything by stating it yet.)
Under "How is the energetic created;" and subsequent headings, viewer R is pretty clear that Earth is the source.
Q2: Is it possible to distinguish between - energy from Earth's gravity? - or energy from Earth's stored rotational energy? - or both?
Viewer M states "Target appears to be a structure or object close to or containing water." (This compares with "aspect of water was not looked at, probably thing must be put into water at the beginning" in the Evert/Jelinski RV).
Q3: Can any further clarification of this reference to water be obtained?
Viewer M also states "Centrifugal force, out then in, round and round."
Q4: What is going out then in?
Re Viewer J's report:
Q4: Can "cylinders/columns," "odd bulging shape," "inverse force," be clarified?
On p14 of the pdf, viewer J says "these are important"
Q5: What are "these"?
In the Detailed Reports, I agree that "Mosaic" did well with Bessler's death. I found the report of "Ear3" interesting; someone who obviously knows some physics. Under "D" Ear3 notes "Bernoulli's principle at work?"
Q5: Can any more light be shed on this? (What I have in mind is a more general interpretation, i.e. movement in one direction causing a force in a perpendicular direction, e.g. centrifugal force).
I realise that it may well not be possible to get much more useful information on any of these questions. But anyway, there they are, for whatever they're worth.
Not enough checking! Obviously in the above, the second Q4 should be Q5, then on to Q6 and Q7.
ReplyDeleteJohn, everything is functional on the safari browser as well, for Mac users, if you want to add it.
ReplyDeleteThe reports are interesting, especially since they didn't know what they were trying to view in the past. Maybe they WERE reading your mind. The fall from the windmill is so uncannily close to the truth, it makes me wonder if maybe, just maybe, they knew who you were.
Thanks Doug, I'll add the safari browser.
ReplyDeleteI wondered if they knew of me too, but as I wrote on the forum, I can only accept what they tell me which is that their remote viewers know only the file number. We only have a choice of accepting the reports as genuine attempts to remote view with no other information - or they are dishonest efforts to...what? There seems nothing to gain if they are dishonest except some notoriety which would tarnish the reputations of any genuine members who are genuinely trying to accomplish something.
JC
Most probably they did not know you; but they may have heard Bessler's story. On the other hand, let's entertain the idea that those people have the power of remote viewing. The reports point out some possible mechanisms that I have never considered to be the secret. For example; liquids. When we use method of elimination, the liquids must be eliminated, because in Apologia, Bessler mentioned that the wheel can work in very cold weather. But then again, liquids have the strangest property of density. You know that the old oil and water thing. May be the oil is the yellow sticky thing. Let's imagine that he found a way of using liquid density difference to build a mechanism. It's a very very low possibility, but I think we should consider usage of some liquids in the wheel.
ReplyDeleteIf they didn't know you, or hadn't been aware of the bessler story, but were still able to get the images of the past that they did from a sequence of eight numbers is hard to believe.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the odds? That any two of the viewers would see similar objects, people, events, from the past , just from a sequence of 8 numbers with no meaning? Is it beyond coincidence? I don't know, I'd have to know more about the viewers to make an informed opinion.