#27 - MED - Follow-up on Why-Win-Nona, clustering and biotropic clues
Hello once again, this is JLL with Gnostic Intel on the internet. It's the 12th of April 2017. This is upload number 25 on Mandela Effect Decoded. I'm calling it follow-up of “Win Why Nona” and I'm going to discuss clustering and biotropic clues. So how's that for an exotic intro?
Now my purpose really here is twofold. I've seen a lot of action in relation/response to the decoding of the Winona-Wynona clue, and I'd like to review a few of the points I made in that talk. Secondly, I’d like to take you over a few procedural or technical points. Remember that I suggested from the beginning that you consider this investigation of the Mandela effect along Gnostic lines to be like a tour of a crime scene. I trust that you're keeping that analogy in mind. It's a simple and helpful one, I think.
And as you do so, don't forget to recall from time to time that felicitous phrase, all the clues in the world don’t count if you don’t know what crime has been committed. So what I showed in the deciphering of the Win-Wynona clue is that there is a content in the Mandela shift, and that content can be decoded or deciphered by reference to an independent body of material, body of information if you will, that’s already existing in the world and serves as a cipher-text.
You know, I stand by my claim, and I'm really going to back it up big time, you can count on that, my claim regarding the fraudulence of D-Wave quantum computers. And when I explained what a cipher text is, I used the analogy of a cryptographic tool, a code that is extremely simple to write by using a book as the translation tool.
You know, it's a theme in films about serial killers, like Hannibal Lecter and others. You recall that theme, that the serial killer sometimes communicates to the public or communicates to his accomplices through references to biblical passages. So there might be a short message in a personal ad in a newspaper that has a sequence of numbers in it, and those numbers mean nothing unless you already know, externally and independently, that they refer to a chapter and verse of a certain book of the Bible.
I use the example of “To the Finland Station” because it happened to be sitting on my desk at the moment that I was recording that talk. But you could, anyone, any one of you could compose ten lines of code consisting of three numbers separated by two hyphens, 27, 14, 14 and that would refer to page 27 line 14, word 14. And you could turn those 10 lines of code over to the D-Wave quantum computer and it would never be able to figure out the 10 words in the message composed in that code without knowing the book that you used to write the code.
So there you go, that's the analogy that applies to this investigation. You're not going to be able to figure out, doesn't apply to all of the clues by the way, because they have different vectorial functions as I've explained and will continue to explain, because as the investigation unfolds and as we go deeper into the decoding, it's good from time to time to step back and review procedure, which I'm going to do mainly in this talk.
But I'm sure you get the drift by now. It would be impossible to get to the content of some of these clues and signals coming to you through the Mandela effect if you do not know where to look in the independent sources, in the independent material to which the signals are keyed. Okay?
I mean, I don't know what you think, but I think this is pretty exciting and what a breakthrough in the approach to the Mandela Effect. As you know, if you've been following the investigation more or less consistently so far, it appears that I am taking a unique approach in a number of respects. Mainly, this approach is unique in that we presume, as investigators on the crime scene that there is content in the clues.
Obviously there has to be content in the clues or else it's not a clue. So, win-wyn, the different two different spellings of her name capture your attention, they ping your attention. Well, where do you go from there? Well, you can't go anywhere unless you presume that there must be some content in that signal. And what magnificent content it turns out to be, because the win-wyn-nona clue points directly, literally, verbatim, to one of the most important passages in the whole Nag Hammadi material, one of the rare passages that refers to the correction of the Aeon Sophia. Well how wonderful is that?
No doubt about it, with this particular clue, you take a flying leap into the depths of the signal array coming through these Mandela effects. You go right to the heart of the message and to the source of the message. Further decipherment leads to the name of Mnemosyne, the nine fold muse, or goddess of memory. Now what do you think of the statistics of that?
Do you know how many, well let's just say Greek mythology, we wouldn't go anywhere else, do you know how many names of goddesses and variations of goddess lore there are in Greek mythology? And yet the first one that comes up in decoding this particular signal is a direct score on a divine entity said to be the goddess of memory and what are we doing in this investigation? We're looking into a baffling phenomenon of memory.
So, it's quite thrilling and I would point out by the way that Gnostic Intel is like that. You know when you are handling genuine Gnostic Intel because there's always a bit of a thrill in it somewhere along the way. Now let me review just very quickly, let me run over some of the points I made regarding what's happening with memory due to the Mandela effect.
Basically what I said was that the signals that are coming through this effect are not merely revealing themselves as anomalies of memory. That's obvious, everybody knows that, that's why it gets your attention in the first place, right? And that's why people are, you know, debating it with some division, obviously, but hopefully without acrimony and without hostility, because there's nothing to argue about.
The Mandela Effect is just a phenomenon of nature, like any other phenomenon, but it happens to be supernatural. And as a matter of fact, as you might understand if you went into Mythophrenia and listened to the talks on the supernatural that you find there, there are three fundamental talks on the supernatural. You'll find that the way I define the supernatural is entirely free of presumptions and metaphysics. The supernatural is the fountainhead of the natural.
So, all around you is the natural world, you are part of the natural world, your sensory functions, sight, hearing, taste, are part of the natural world, they're given to you by nature, they're evolved through natural processes, even your psychic functions such as memory, imagination, fantasy, even your emotions are part of nature. And if you look more deeply into this entire field of natural events, which includes the presence and activity of the human animal on the planet, if you look deeper into it, if you look intensively, as Goethe proposed in his method of observation, then you see that there is a supernatural matrix and a supernatural foundation to everything that is natural.
The supernatural is the source and foundation of the natural. That's my premise, end of story. And it is a QED, it's something to be demonstrated, it's nothing to be taken on faith. So you're really learning to handle the supernatural when you enter this investigation and you learn how to reach deeper, to reach in-depth to the content that is coming through the signals of this bizarre phenomenon.
It reveals itself as an anomaly of memory. Clear enough. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. But, we're taking it a step deeper, aren't we? I'm saying to you that the source of this effect is actually working on your memory and working in your memory with a deliberate purpose, a deliberate long-term purpose. And guess what? A certain group of the instances of the effect, certain clusters as I'm calling them, clusters of signal clusters, or clusters of clues, explain to you what she is doing in the human psyche and what she is doing to the human species as a whole by subjecting us to this effect.
It's so user-friendly. Some of the Mandela effects, as I've explained, point to the source, some of them point to the way the effect works, the way it's intended to work. For instance, “Mama always said life was like a box of chocolates”. “Mama always said life is like a box of chocolates”. You never know what you're going to get. Now this is a beautiful friendly signal, comical, touching, she's using the story of a simpleton as if she were to say to you, hi, I'm your cosmic mom and I don't care if you're a simpleton, I can even reach a simpleton. And what she's saying is, well, my children, as simple-minded as you may be, you can certainly get this point.
There was a time when life was like a box of chocolates, and you never knew what you're going to get. But that's not the way it is now. With this effect, with these signals, you know what you're getting. You're gonna know what you're going to get. It's mantic. She is not only acting upon the human mind by an intervention and a miracle of divination into your mind, but she is invoking the powers of divination that you have. She is aiming to make you mantic, that you become mantic in the mutation she wishes to produce in the human species.
This is how deep this thing goes and you go deep into it from the very start. You know, it's like I said about planetary tantra, there's no progression, there's no hierarchy, there's no grading along the way. You jump right in at the deep end. If you're getting this, you're getting it in its depth, and the art of mantic comes to you as you navigate in those depths. I guess it has to be said that in the latter part of that talk to which I'm referring, I don't know if it was 18 or 19, I did say some fairly deep things. I mean, I did make some deep comments, didn't I?
And, you know, I was a little bit concerned about that afterwards because I thought, well, maybe that's not a good technique as a teacher to make make those in-depth propositions to state them in that way, because my goal is to have you come to it through your own faculties. That's the goal. Education means the drawing forth of the faculties of the student. It doesn't mean stuffing things in the student's face. And, you know, that riff on recombinant DNA, the synthetic power of memory, just looking at my notes here, I'm a bit stunned by my own comments. You know, well, what did I say?
Recombinant memory is the phenomenon induced by the effect. Well, that's pretty deep stuff, isn't it? And then I went on further to allude to some processes at the molecular level, processes of molecular memory and a braiding, by the way that's another Mandela fact coming through the girlish icon for Wendy's hamburgers, Wendy's braids.
So I was talking about her braiding your memory and recombining it, and yet I haven't really led up to that claim, have I? I haven't really built that proposition. I haven't developed it for you, have I? I just put it in your face. Well, sometimes that will happen, and I guarantee you that when I do that, I will do my very level best at some later point to show the development toward that statement, because it is not consistent with my method of teaching as a Gnostic that I would ever force upon you a statement that I expect you to believe without verification or proof.
By the way, and this is optional, this is not obligatory, but if you want to learn something about molecular memory, which is a fantastic subject that pertains to many phenomena in the natural world, it pertains to the behavior of many animals, pertains to activity on the microscopic and molecular level as well as it pertains to her supernatural designs and purposes now manifesting in the Mandela Effect.
Wowser, if you want to learn about that, then go read the “Parable of the Beast” by John Bleibtreu, B-L-E-I-B-T-R-E-U. It's a classic work on ethology from the 1960s, and it's very important to know what ethology is. It's the most important study of animal behavior that has been produced in the 20th century, and it has been almost entirely forgotten.
Now I don't have a lot of homework for you to do, believe me there's plenty to do in this investigation, so I don't want to send you off reading the Nag Hammadi materials and if you do read them, please go to metahistory.org and read my commentaries. Do not go to the scholarly translations. But I don't, it's not necessary to do a lot of background homework, but this subject of molecular memory is a spectacular one. It pertains deeply to the process underway, and so you might want to read this book, a great, great classic, The Parable of the Beast.
Okay, finally, before I wrap up this talk with a reference to some terminology that I posted in the tracking page, I just want to correct myself regarding a little outburst I made about the term timeline. I think I might have overreacted there a bit to the use of that term, which is frequent in discussions of the Mandela Effect. So let's look at a definition we can agree on, as Socrates noted in the Georgias, for the sake of having a coherent dialogue.
Timeline doesn't mean another path of time or a parallel time track. A timeline is not a time track. Let's agree that a timeline is simply a chronological record of events. For instance, the timeline of the invasion of Iraq or the timeline of the Kennedy assassination or something like that. So, the timeline means a chronological, moment-by-moment record of events, okay?
If that's the sense in which it's being used in discussions of the Mandela Effect, I have no objection and we can say there are two timelines in the sense that there are different records of events but there are not two time tracks involved. The individuals who hold or report these different records of events, that is to say different memories of the same events, are still living in the same time track.
So I may have overreacted by assuming that when people say timeline they mean time track. If they do mean time track, then I didn't overreact, because the notion that there are parallel time tracks and parallel parallel universes popping up all over the place is a complete waste of time, and it is a shaggy dog story of a shaggy dog who chased another shaggy dog who was telling a story to another shaggy dog about the shaggy dog that that shaggy dog was chasing while it was telling the story to itself about the shaggy dog that was chasing it.
That's what you get with multiple parallel universes and I assure you there's a hell of a lot better than that in the delivery and the frosting on this cake is much much more entertaining and far superior for its clarity than any of that kind of talk. So that's the basis of my reaction and once in a while I fly off the handle. I think I was a little bit reckless at that point.
Alright, now I'm going to conclude by referring you to the tracking page. I would have you note that we are now on tracking page number three. Now by the time we get to this investigation, if you print out the total record of the tracking pages, you probably have a substantial little manual that contains a timeline of this investigation of the Mandela Effect. So great. Now I’ve broken it down because, I’ve broken it down into one, two, three pages, obviously because you get tired of scrolling down the same page all the time.
So you'll find here on at the top of tracking page number three that I have repeated some terms that were listed on the previous tracking page. One of those terms is nominative. We use the term nominative to refer uniquely to the Mandela effect first example of Nelson Mandela himself because the effect derives its name from that example. So that's a unique case, set that aside.
I also use the term synoptic clues, which carry a component that can only be deciphered by allusion or reference to the ciphered text or auxiliary tool, and in this case the main auxiliary tool is the body of Gnostic teachings in five parts.
So we saw that this Winona Wynona clue referred in a spectacular manner to that body of ancient teachings, which is unique in the way that it presents a complete and comprehensive narrative of the Earth and the human species. Scripted clues, another term I propose, are those clues which lead to a specific integral narrative that may be either historical or otherwise. It may be mythical, alluding to legend or fairy tale.
For instance, seven dwarfs alludes to the mythical narrative of the Hebdomad, of the Archons, the seven Archons, which is a subplot of the fallen goddess scenario. So, seven dwarfs is a scripted clue. The scripted clues and the synoptic clues are more or less interchangeable.
Additionally, there may be clues and some fascinating examples are coming up soon that allude to specific historical narratives and the effect highlights these narratives. So I'm calling them not historical but his-story-al. It points in the direction of something in history, not a mythical narrative or a legend but something in actual recorded history.
Historiography is the art of writing history based on a remembered record of facts, persons, and events. So we'll see when we get to the Charles Schultz effect, which concerns spelling his last name with or without a T, that again there is content carried in the signal. You can sit there all afternoon and think, oh gee, was it Schultz or I can't even remember now. I thought I used to remember that it was spelled with a T, but now I'm not sure. How many times has this happened to you, right?
You stall at the ping. Don’t stall at the ping. The ping is only there to get your attention. The T in the last name or not in the last name is only there to get your attention. Then go investigate the content of the clue. And what we find, if you do that, if you even go just to Wikipedia, gruesome as it may be, and you'll find that there is an incident in the life of Charles Schultz when he was in the army that's very pertinent to this investigation.
Finally, I want to talk about biotropic clues because they play a role, a vivid role I must say, in the Winona Wynona instance. So biotropic means tending to be biographical, tending to go to your biographical material. So there are, and it's interesting because I hadn't intended to bring this up so early in the investigation, but we're not early in the investigation, are we? We’re a third of the way through, so here goes.
You are going to find, as I have found, that in the general and overall sense, the signals coming into your mind through the Mandela effect consolidate or constellate in two ways. In one way, they constellate into a massive generic message, which is true for everyone, call it a universal message. A large number of the clues point to this message and obviously you're getting a sense of what this message is about. It's about the Earth and it's about the planetary intelligence and our Divine Mother and it's about her situation and the human situation and what has gone wrong with the divine experiment on Earth which she initiated, and what are we going to do about the Archons and their proxies, and these sort of things. That constellation of clues I call the generic constellation, and the story revealed through that clustering of clues is the same for everyone, because it's a story about the species, it's a story to guide the species.
But at the same time, amazingly, I am proposing, on the basis of my own experience, which I'm going to demonstrate right here, that there are also specific clues that will come to you in your investigation of the Mandela Effect which refer to your life and you specifically. So wait a minute now what exactly am I saying here? Well I'm saying that the Aeonic Mother, as I want to call her, I love to call her, the Aeon Sophia, also dedicated talk to tell you how I can speak about her in the way I do.
The goal of the Aeonic Mother is not only to reveal something to you that pertains to all of humanity, but there is a piece of your action in the signals she's putting out as well. A piece of the action of your life is carried by some signals and I call those biotropic. Tropic is from the word tropos meaning to turn. For instance, heliotropism is the tendency of plants to turn toward the sun, so those clues that turn toward your biographical matter, to the biographical facts of your life, are biotropic clues.
And as I noted here in the written material on the tracking page, when I investigated the winona wynona clue, I found that it was loaded with biotropic clues that refer to me. For instance, I met Winona Ryder's mother, her name is Cindy Palmer, and had an extremely delightful meeting with Cindy Palmer in Santa Fe, New Mexico some years ago, and we discussed her book, “Shakti Woman”. Now that's pretty interesting clue, because Shakti is another name for the Divine Mother, the Divine Feminine. Shakti woman, almond shock, shock Shakti, you know.
So there I am years back, in person, in my own little biographical movie, one person away from Winona Ryder talking to a mother. I was also associated professionally with Winona's father, Michael Horowitz, because he's a curator of the Timothy Leary archives, and my friend and partner for many years was the ex-wife of Timothy Leary. So I also had contact with Timothy Leary some years earlier.
Additionally, because Coppola is in the mix, it's all in that tiny little article. This is all in like a four paragraph article, clipping. Francis Ford Coppola is mentioned and sure enough through my biographical association with Jan Kerouac, I had some professional dealings with his company Zoetrope concerning the use of the rights of “On the Road” written by Jan's father Jack Kerouac.
Now that is a pack, that is a package of biotropic clues and I venture to say that this is not necessarily unusual. I am not certainly not setting myself out as an exception in a singular example. I don't have any other examples to offer yet, but I have noted that students and allies of mine who are investigating the Mandela effect are finding that some of the clues are biotropic, also biotropic. You have to understand they're also biotropic. So the fundamental content of the Winona Wynona clue is not biotropic. It's generic and universal, but for me it's also extremely biotropic.
And I venture to say that you're going to have the same experience. You're going to find that biotropic components appear at various points as you put together the big picture of what the Mandela effect is about and what it is attempting to say to the human species.
I was floored by this news clipping, as a matter of fact, I remember very clearly being in Santa Fe at the time that this Kate Capshaw and Steven Spielberg romance happened and in fact his former wife Amy Irving was one of the person responsible for blowing the cover of Santa Fe, New Mexico and turning it into a bedroom community for Hollywood stars. Because she went on the Tonight Show sometime, I think it was in the early 80s, and started yakking about how beautiful Santa Fe was, and then all these people, Jack Nicholson and all these people, started to come there, and they ruined the town of course.
So I was acutely aware of the gossip that was going around Santa Fe at the time that Steven Spielberg got together with Kate Capshaw and so it was like when I read when I found this little clip from this obscure little paper the “Brian Times”, my jaw was hanging to the floor, to use that lovely expression. Fine, that illustrates what are biotropic clues or the biotropic component in some of the clues you'll be investigating.
I want to close with a definition and a procedural observation about clustering, because this same clipping also presents an example of clustering of the clues signaled by the Mandela effect. Think again of the analogy of a jigsaw puzzle. You have the frame made, the puzzle is all squared in, but you don't put the puzzle together consistently, you put it together in clumps or clusters, don't you? And what typically happens when you have a couple of clusters that suddenly fit together?
Remember I used the analogy of a farmyard scene. So there's a woman standing by a well with a bucket. That's a large cluster. And it has all these jagged edges around it. And then over here you've put together a smaller cluster that has a dog in it. And then at a certain moment you see that a projecting piece from the cluster with the woman at the well, which is like a tongue or tab, fits into the cluster that depicts the dog, and so you join them.
So what you can look forward to is clusters consisting of sometimes five or six individual puzzle pieces, sometimes only two puzzle pieces, that's the smallest cluster obviously, clusters of clues produced by the Mandela effect. And then you will find the interlocking of these clusters. I'll demonstrate that right here.
The winona, wynona clues in this passage and the mention of the name Sophia, although it's spelled with an F because it's a woman's name and not the goddess name, spelled PH, which is also very significant, if you know what PH is, chemically speaking. That set of clues, which constitutes a significant cluster, connects to another set, which has the name Steven Spielberg on it. Well, no big surprise perhaps, but those of you familiar with the inventory of Mandela Effects know that Steven Spielberg and his films do come up, don’t they?
For instance, Jaws is a film made by Steven Spielberg and it has in it a line illustrating the Mandela effect. “We're going to need a bigger boat”, “you're going to need a bigger boat”. Who's the we and who's the you? And why would there be a division between we and you in the human species.
You see, once again, if you stall at the ping and you just wonder, you know, we, you, you, we, you go into a kind of a spin, don't you? A kind of spin of cognitive dissonance, because your mind is being captured and dazzled by something. But the rule of this investigation, as I stated at the beginning of this talk, is to follow the signal into the content, follow it in depth.
And when you follow the Steven Spielberg clue in depth, it takes you to Indiana Jones, doesn't it? Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Indiana Jones and the what? What was the first Indiana Jones film? And what are the themes of the Indian Jones films. Well, the first one was a Jewish theme: search for the ark of the covenant. One of the later ones was: the theme of the quest for the Holy Grail.
These factors, these narrative factors, and they're straight out of Hollywood film making, are part of the content of that cluster of clues indicated by the name Steven Spielberg. It stands alone as a cluster until you that moment comes, as happens in any jigsaw puzzle, when you see that part of the cluster of Steven Spielberg clues has an indentation or a tongue that fits neatly into the cluster of the Winona-Wynona clues, and then you're on to something big. Then you're on to the big picture coming together as the clusters of clues, or constellations as Jung would call them, converge.
So there we are at 41 minutes, which is absolutely off the charts for an upload, but I do what I can do and I make no excuses for being myself. So until the next time, may your attention be rewarded by the truth.