It is currently Wed Sep 26, 2018 3:26 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Cue Formulation WITHOUT a photo - MH370 
Author Message
Advanced User
Advanced User

Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 2:19 am
Posts: 95
Location: St. Louis, Mo. - Pre DVD04
Post Re: Cue Formulation WITHOUT a photo - MH370
Tiger74 wrote:
I think we're adding confusion by focusing too much on cultural significance vs. legal ownership. There is no dichotomy there when it comes to cue formulation. A properly constructed cue will work regardless if either is present. Planet Pluto/smallest rock , for example.

But if you wanted to try that cue based on its cultural significance (not an established RV term by the way, just one that we seem to have come up with) then...


I am not confused at all. I didn’t say or imply that those were the only things. Your example is not a good one. Pluto is a cultural term. A Zeta Reptilian probably wouldn’t know what a Pluto was. A dog? A planet? Fortunately, I get your point.

When Nostradamus peered into the future he, probably, didn’t use a Cue. I believe what he said he did was look for points in time that rose above the background noise. But, he had to use terms that were of his time to relate his visions into culturally defined word forms.

There are reasons we need a cue one of them is to be specific. So we get that which is sought. Also, we use terms so that when we are analyzing the results we have a place to start piecing the picture together. Call it the picture on the puzzle box. Not a great example but hopefully it conveys the point. Better yet, if there were only words on the puzzle box: “Dog”, “Shay Stadium”, “Grand Canyon”. The more specific the wording the easier the picture is recognized when piecing it together.

Edited to add:

Those specific words we use are defined culturally, technically, legally, commonly, personally and maybe others. So I think your statement that we do not need "those" things present for a properly constructed cue is unsound.



Tiger74 wrote:
I just try to keep in mind how/if something is tied-to or associated with whatever I'm trying to qualify. That was my thought process when I constructed the above cue to find out about the cause(s) of the crash. I hope I'm explaining that adequately.


I get it. The problem is you can say there is an association but can’t explain or define it. You see the association as the strong. The example of the sentence was what I would say is a weak association. That is the what I am trying to get you tell me. Define the association. I did it by showing a strong cultural significance for MH370 (Not trying to add confusion but it is more of an internationally recognized term and falls short of a globally recognized term) and then for Malaysian Flight 370 I used a proven cue form and probably terminology.

You are just saying “I see the association. Therefore it is satisfactory”. I am not even arguing that it is not. I am just trying to get you to tell me how\why Malaysian Airlines airplane is associated with 9M-MRO and why it is better than MH370 or Malaysian Flight 370. You have done a good job as to why. I am having trouble defending your attacks\points\arguments and as I have posted before, I have ideas about using 9M-MRO.

Tiger74 wrote:
This might work(again, due to cultural significance) but the immediate problem I see is that Flight 370 is a like a scheduling procedure designation and therefore can't be 'missing'. It's not a tangible object. Also, like we discussed earlier, there may now be more than one flight data recorder associated with this Flight 370 designation.
Actually I meant that I might consider adding current missing to my cue. Actually, missing would probably be enough to be sure.


I know. This was not the reason I did it. I did it because of your valid argument that there may be more than one FDR associated with Flight 370. The current missing should clear this up as surely there is only one current missing Flight 370 with only one FDRs associated with it.

The Flight Data recorder is the tangible missing object.

Edit: Can ideas go missing? From personal experience I think so.


A now see MH370 has been retired as a flight designation. The missing plane was the finale one. Which gives us another avenue of specificity. Remember kiddos: Last can mean previous or finale. So we use those terms instead.

Edit: I now realize that even though they retired the numbers the Finale Flight may not have been the flight we are talking about. I may address this further later.

Tiger74 wrote:
I would restructure it like this:
Current missing Malaysian Airlines Flight 370/ Flight Data Recorder/ Location Now


Why?

_________________
"Wretched mind, do you, who get your evidence from us, yet try to overthrow us? Our overthrow will be our downfall." -Democritus


Wed May 21, 2014 4:24 pm
Profile
Ultimate User
Ultimate User

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:35 am
Posts: 447
Location: Tennessee/in flux
Post Re: Cue Formulation WITHOUT a photo - MH370
I'll reply to this most recent post and then address your post about using TRM.

RossU wrote:
Your example is not a good one. Pluto is a cultural term. A Zeta Reptilian probably wouldn’t know what a Pluto was. A dog? A planet?

I specified planet in the cue. And my point was that there is no 'cultural significance' and/or 'legal ownership' (as far as we know) associated with the smallest rock on the planet Pluto. And yes I know the planet Pluto has been demoted in recent times but the Matrix will still respond to our word-idea Planet Pluto. I don't think that will ever change but I would have to attempt to use that search term in a cue 100 years or so from now to see. Tangentially, it may be worth noting here the difference between pre and post-9/11 Matrix adjudication of the word-idea terrorist.

But to maybe pick a better example in terms of your comments about cultural significance and Zeta Reptilians, consider the cue and the workshop class' results from DVD-3 target 5. For my example here, consider the workshop class a 'culture' by itself. Assume there is no one there familiar with Chinese writing. Now see how that situation may relate to your comments above.

RossU wrote:
When Nostradamus peered into the future he, probably, didn’t use a Cue. I believe what he said he did was look for points in time that rose above the background noise. But, he had to use terms that were of his time to relate his visions into culturally defined word forms.

The methodologies of natural psychics, seers, scryers, soothsayers, prognosticators, etc. are not germane to the educational purposes of this LearnRV methodology forum. Those can be interesting discussions outside of the forum some day. But of course, we are limited by our own lexicon or experience when it comes to objectifying our remote viewing perceptions.

RossU wrote:
Those specific words we use are defined culturally, technically, legally, commonly, personally and maybe others. So I think your statement that we do not need "those" things present for a properly constructed cue is unsound.

We need to those things to help objectify perceptions and understand our remote viewing data, but not in a cue. It may not always be possible. Again, see my above example about DVD-3 target 5.

RossU wrote:
Tiger74 wrote:
I just try to keep in mind how/if something is tied-to or associated with whatever I'm trying to qualify. That was my thought process when I constructed the above cue to find out about the cause(s) of the crash. I hope I'm explaining that adequately.


I get it. The problem is you can say there is an association but can’t explain or define it.

My home address is a unique identifier and is tide-to and associated with my house. Define that association. It still works whether you define the association or not.

RossU wrote:
Last can mean previous or finale. So we use those terms instead.

Last can mean previous, most recent or final.

RossU wrote:
Tiger74 wrote:
I would restructure it like this:
Current missing Malaysian Airlines Flight 370/ Flight Data Recorder/ Location Now


Why?

Again, I wouldn't pick that cue myself. But it may still work for all the reasons you have stated about its cultural significance. I would restructure it this way because that first slash mark you had was unnecessary so I removed it to clean it up and be more precise. It probable wouldn't have a been a game changer if we had left it though.
But again, I must insist that Flight 370 and MH370 are flight schedule designations that incorporate clock times of arrival/departure, gate numbers, aircraft(s), airline designations, etc. That group of information, at present time, is not missing. Only a specific airplane associated with that designation is missing, presumably. That's why I choose to go with a specifically designated (by a unique identifier-registration number) airplane rather than a flight designation.

Now, about your previous posts using TRM:

We may be starting to break off from the original educational purpose of this thread that has to do with cue formulation without a photo. I don't know if Kocmodpom wanted to exclude any and all target reference material for this exercise but since he didn't specify, I will address your suggestions.

First off, I would not write/print the TRNs and cue on any TRM. You risk ambiguity doing that, as those TRNs would become associated with everything on the page/article.

The proper way to prepare your targeting material in your first example is to write the following TRNs and cue on the outside of the folder or on an index card:
not
[nnnn/nnnn] Malaysian Airlines flight MH370/Black Box/Location Now
but rather
[nnnn/nnnn] Malaysia Airlines flight MH370/black box/location now
I altered it to reflect the proper name and remove unnecessary capital letters, again, to be neat/precise/succinct and remove as much vagueness/ambiguity as/whenever possible.

Then you take the article and, with a black pen, underline only black boxes. Then take the article with the underlined words and place it in the target folder and it becomes the target reference material (TRM). The problem here though, as you may have figured out by now, is that the cue is ambiguous and refers to more than one 'box'. You will get data associated with both 'boxes'.

The same issues apply to your second TRM suggestion. Those suggestions/targeting strategies may still get you what you want, but they wouldn't be my first choices as they are still too ambiguous. If you found a different article, one that differentiates between the two recorders, you might have more to work with.

So to sum up, so far we have three cues to choose from that I feel would be best suited to accomplish the intended goal of this thread.

Malaysia Airlines airplane 9M-MRO/flight data recorder/location now
Malaysia Airlines airplane 9M-MRO/cockpit voice recorder/location now
Current missing Malaysian Airlines Flight 370/ flight data recorder/ location now

Anyone else want to offer their thoughts/suggestions/questions?


Thu May 22, 2014 6:58 pm
Profile
Advanced User
Advanced User

Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 2:19 am
Posts: 95
Location: St. Louis, Mo. - Pre DVD04
Post Re: Cue Formulation WITHOUT a photo - MH370
In this post, I am going to respond to the most recent post by Tiger74 and have this be the final post before I switch from supporting\defending MH370 and Malaysia Airlines flight 370 to supporting\arguing for use of registration numbers. Let me start this final post by thanking Tiger74 for the discussion and putting up with it. These replies take time and force one to try to clearly lay out your point. Which is great for the learning processes:

Tiger74 wrote:
Now, about your previous posts using TRM:

Last can mean previous, most recent or final.


Thank you for clearing up my disaster of a spur-of-the-moment attempt from memory at setting up TRM and use of ‘Last’. I should have consulted my notes first. I assure you, this public failing will stick in my mind and be a strong reminder as to how to do it and to check my notes first when it matters the most.

See, this is why I love screwing up. I always have an opportunity to learn after. Yes. I do get a lot of opportunities to learn.

Tiger74 wrote:
First off, do not write/print the TRNs and cue on any TRM. You risk ambiguity doing that, as those TRNs would become associated with everything on the page/article.

The proper way to prepare your targeting material in your first example is to write the following TRNs and cue on the outside of the folder or on an index card:

[nnnn/nnnn] Malaysia Airlines flight MH370/black box/location now

Then you take the article and, with a black pen, underline only black boxes. Then take the article with the underlined words and place it in the target folder and it becomes the target reference material (TRM).


Why would you only underline the black boxes? M.A. flight 370 is also located within the TRM though not well associated with the article. Is that it? Because the article is about black boxes?
I ask for the reasons because the use of TRM may be helpful when formulating a cue using the registration numbers.

Tiger74 wrote:
I would restructure it like this:
Current missing Malaysian Airlines Flight 370/ Flight Data Recorder/ Location Now

But it may still work for all the reasons you have stated about its cultural significance. I would restructure it this way because that first slash mark you had was unnecessary so I removed it to clean it up and be more precise. It probable wouldn't have a been a game changer if we had left it though.

Flight 370 is a like a scheduling procedure designation and therefore can't be 'missing'. It's not a tangible object.


First, I never argued ‘Malaysia Airlines flight 370’ for cultural significance. I argued proven cue structure (corollary - TWA flight 800) and probable terminology(your Cue with airplane crash). I argued ‘MH370’ was a culturally significant term and, inadvertently(no corollary exits), proven cue structure (TWA flight 800).



On your point about MA flight 370 not being missing, and the tangible object being the FDR, then wouldn't a more precise wording look like:

Malaysian Airlines flight 370/ current missing flight data recorder/ location now


Tiger74 wrote:
I specified planet in the cue. And my point was that there is no 'cultural significance' and/or 'legal ownership' (as far as we know) associated with the smallest rock on the planet Pluto.


A Zeta Reptilian would have known or understood none of those terms. I could have picked any word\term. At one point in history there were no terms for planet, Pluto, smallest, or rock in our culture. Those terms were birthed and grow in our culture. Etymologist are particularly interested in this. Our culture defines every term\word we use. So there is cultural significance to the phrase “smallest rock”. If it is the smallest we could measure it to see if truly it was the smallest rock. Also, there is a technical side to this because at some point of decreasing size that rock becomes something else. In addition, “rock” has several definitions:

Geological - a stone of any size, especially one small enough to be picked up and used as a projectile.

Informal - a precious stone, especially a diamond

Informal - a small piece of crack cocaine

The terms we use to communicate verbally and writtenly(slang) at least have common cultural significance to them. Or else we wouldn’t be able to communicate.

Definitions can be technical, legal definitions, slang, an ‘inside joke’, etc. It is important to understand that most words have multiple meanings, such as ‘last’, because we need to be specific.

This is from a web search for ‘cultural significant word’:

“Some terms acquire new meaning faster than a typical dictionary can capture the change. The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy includes contemporary word usage as well as essential and classic terms from the Bible, mythology, philosophy, literature, world history, geography, anthropology, psychology, and sociology. The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy is a wonderful alternative for learning the meaning of important words and ideas.”

This is what I was arguing for with MH370. It is like the slang term “writtenly”. MH370 has been defined by our culture and is an international known term for “A missing plane flown by Malaysia Airlines during flight 370”. Though this argument is a red herring because there are several other meanings that have cultural definitions. For instance, “Malaysia Airlines flight 370 the CIA operation”. Also, it will, probably, never get to the significance level of “writtenly”. Which weakens its salience further.

Edit: It just dawned on me that a, perhaps, better term for what I was going for here was neologism.


Tiger74 wrote:
A properly constructed cue will work regardless if either is present. (from earlier post)


The overall point of my Nostradamus example was trying to give an example of a cue ‘working regardless’. A corollary to that example using LRV is to just have a TRN and nothing written after it. This would be a properly “written” cue with no culture significant terms or legal definitions and you would RV something. I found it in my notes, with no reference to where I copied it from, that the Major said “If all you have is a TRN you woud RV yourself Rving”. So you are right. No need for culturally significant terms or legally defined associations (like ownership). Though I never argued there only had to be ‘cultural significance’ or ‘legal ownership’. I never said it was a dichotomy.

What I did say was that the idea of a cue working regardless of either was unsound. Meaning not well-founded or valid. While one “written” cue does exist, you cannot help but use words and terms that are defined by our culture and that have “cultural significance”.


Tiger74 wrote:
But to maybe pick a better example in terms of your comments about cultural significance and Zeta Reptilians, consider the cue and the workshop class' results from DVD-3 target 5. For my example here, consider the workshop class a 'culture' by itself. Assume there is no one there familiar with Chinese writing. Now see how that situation may relate to your comments above.


Again not sound. The Chinese character was defined by the culture in which it was used. Therefore, a culturally significant term. Not to us but them. We could RV a Zeta Reptilians pictograph\ideograph and get, at least, our cultures analogous terms for it. A possibility does exists that there would be no corollary. But, it lies beyond the scope of the current discussion.

Tiger74 wrote:
My home address is a unique identifier and is tide-to and associated with my house. Define that association. It still works whether you define the association or not.


As I was not defending your cue, the onus was on you to define and\or explain the words, terms and associations within it. However, since I am switching to arguing for registration numbers I may touch on this example later. I will switch to a more analogous relation when I explain why I do not agree with the beginning of your cue. I will use that analogy to suggest another way of using the registration numbers.

Indeed, it will still work if we define the association or not. The point that we could give the cue to anyone, if they understood the association or not, if they knew all the terms (a Chinese character) in it or not is an important one. As a tasker, it is important to ensure that everyone could use the cue and that it will return what is sought. To do that, you need to know the terms, their definitions, the strengths and weaknesses of the associations and with that knowledge you can build other cues that are specific.

Quote:
[nnnn/nnnn] Malaysian Airlines flight MH370/Black Box/Location Now
but rather
[nnnn/nnnn] Malaysia Airlines flight MH370/black box/location now

I altered it to reflect the proper name and remove unnecessary capital letters, again, to be neat/precise/succinct and remove as much vagueness/ambiguity as/whenever possible.


See, this is what I am talking about. You did a great job of recognizing my sloppiness and told me why. The rules are of grammar are laid in specific culturally significant recognized and defined ways. We could look them up and know “Black Boxes” is not a proper noun. It is a common noun by definition so do not capitalize it. We should capitalize “Malaysia” and “Airlines” because they are part of a proper noun.

A Zeta Reptilian would have no idea about any of this. But, he could still RV the cue if it was properly set up. When we RV'd the Chinese character we assumed that it followed all of the rules set up by their culture. If a stroke was not done properly it would effect the results of our RV session. It would be a poorly written cue.

Arguing for registration numbers

Coming Soon...

_________________
"Wretched mind, do you, who get your evidence from us, yet try to overthrow us? Our overthrow will be our downfall." -Democritus


Sat May 24, 2014 8:59 pm
Profile
Advanced User
Advanced User

Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 2:19 am
Posts: 95
Location: St. Louis, Mo. - Pre DVD04
Post Re: Cue Formulation WITHOUT a photo - MH370
Arguing For Registration Numbers

Let me start by saying that I have developed this approach while I was arguing and defending the MH370 and Malaysia Airlines flight 370. I did not have this waiting, ready to go.The ideas within came out of the discussion with Tiger74 and I thank him for his time.

Lets look a few key ideas behind ‘registration number’. Of great interest to us is that they are a unique identifier. Another key aspect of them is that they associate one thing to another. They do this is in a few ways. One is laid out by a set of rules that has definite terms and legal authority. It is protocol that is written and can be referenced. From this legal association of an alpha-numeral and an object, another association happens.

A relevant example of this: Most all airplanes have the registration placed on the aft part of the fuselage, near the tail. So the phrase “tail number’ is used in common parlance. The ‘tail number’ is an association between the airplane and the required registration number by its area-placement on the airframe.

In this same way an airplane becomes associated with a registration number. The association is created because there is a legally necessary association between the registration number and aircraft. Aircraft being the legally defined term. Airplane is not part of that legal definition and a common term. In terms of specificity, aircraft is more specific than airplane when referring to registration numbers.

Obviously, it is not only through a legal or technical protocol that a number becomes associated with an object. We can merely mark an object with a pen and now those two are associated. However, the legal or technical protocol largely eliminates ambiguous associations.

I think that a good analogy can help make the unfamiliar easier to understand. The analogy that holds the corollary is that of licensing a car. I came up with a table of analogous terms but tables don’t work in the forum so I did this:

    Analogous Terms
  • Authorizing Entity Department Of Motor Vehicle International Registry
  • Owner Ross U. Malaysia Airline
  • Make\Model Pontiac Vibe Boeing 777-2H6ER
  • Make\Model ID Type Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) Manufacturer Serial Number(MSN) / Construction Number (CN)
  • Make\Model ID 5Y2SL62884Z44 28420 / 404*
  • Registration Number DF1-N9V 9M-MRO
  • Also Known As Plate, Placard Tail Number
  • Registration Type Motor Vehicle Aircraft
  • Subtypes Passenger, Motorcycle, etc. Airframe, Helicopter
  • Common Names Automobile, Car, Ride Airplane, Aeroplane(British), Plane
  • Route morning drive to work flight 370

*The MSN is 28420 and the plane was the 404th one constructed.

The hardest part of this analogy was the last line “route”. I think the idea that my car went missing during my “morning drive to work” holds the analogy to the plane went missing during “flight 370”. I think this analogy shows that the “370” is a reference to ‘where’ the plane should be flying. As I argued, with all of the press “Malaysia flight 370” probably now is also a ‘what’. But, we can do better within a cue.

For the following let us assume a car has a flight data recorder.

The submitted cue so far then relates this way:

Ross U automobile DF1-N9V / flight data recorder / location now

or

Ross U car DF1-N9V / flight data recorder / location now


This cue may work. However, I think we can be more specific. A good starting point is the owner/operator:

Ross U /

Next lets add the car and vin

Ross U / Pontiac Vibe vehicle identification number 5Y2SL62884Z44 /

That would probably be enough right there. But, to be absolutely sure we have the right car lets add the plate.

Ross U / Pontiac Vibe vehicle identification number 5Y2SL62884Z44 / motor vehicle registration number DF1-N9V /

Something doesn’t seem right here. Is the registration number really a detail of the car? Doesn’t a registration tie an owner to a car? Lets try it this way:

Ross U / motor vehicle registration number DF1-N9V / Pontiac Vibe vehicle identification number 5Y2SL62884Z44

This looks better. Ross U has a motor vehicle registered to him by DF1-N9V. That motor vehicle is a Pontiac Vibe with the vehicle identification number 5Y2SL62884Z44. OK. now lets take that and substitute in the MH370 information:

Malaysia Airline / aircraft registration 9M-MRO / Boeing 777-2H6ER manufacturer serial number 28420 / flight data recorder / location now


Comments? Criticisms?

_________________
"Wretched mind, do you, who get your evidence from us, yet try to overthrow us? Our overthrow will be our downfall." -Democritus


Fri May 30, 2014 2:33 pm
Profile
RV Professional
RV Professional

Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:18 am
Posts: 4328
Location: Shackleton Crater (provisional)
Post Re: Cue Formulation WITHOUT a photo - MH370
FUBAR (K.I.S.S.)

_________________
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take...but by the moments that take our breath away"
(Don't be afraid that your life will end -- be afraid that it will never begin)


Fri Jun 06, 2014 12:40 am
Profile WWW
Advanced User
Advanced User

Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 2:19 am
Posts: 95
Location: St. Louis, Mo. - Pre DVD04
Post Re: Cue Formulation WITHOUT a photo - MH370
OK.

How about:

Boeing 777 / registration 9M-MRO / flight data recorder / location now

_________________
"Wretched mind, do you, who get your evidence from us, yet try to overthrow us? Our overthrow will be our downfall." -Democritus


Fri Jun 06, 2014 6:50 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.
[ Time : 0.178s | 13 Queries | GZIP : On ]