My work here is done

For a long time now I’ve been that employee who steadfastly responds to mass emails of the unfounded, dodgy, urban legend variety with links to the relevant Snopes article or other trustworthy reference. At company ‘awards’ evenings i’m generally ‘fined’ for being the office MythBuster. One year, I got a mug.

So it is with great pride and joy that I sat back to watch a recent email being descended upon by the office at large for the sheer gullibility of the person sending it. You’ve seen it before, I’m sure – the one where the author proves that there is a something weird surrounding the events of September 11, 2001, because of the number of ways they can find the number 11 in selected snippets of related information, a verse from the Koran that doesn’t exist, and some random letters and numbers selected for what they look like in Wingdings font. What ensued was a veritable shitstorm of responses where employees found the number 11 in the unwitting victim’s name, phone extension, other emails he’d sent out, his responses to their responses… eventually dissolving into the outright hilarity that this kind of claim deserves. But what topped it off was these two photos, taken today and sent around with the title ‘A sign of the times’:

A sign of the times Part 1

A sign of the times Part 2

My work here is done.

About these ads

46 Responses to “My work here is done”

  1. zOMG!! teh 0n3z0rz!!1!!one!!nelson!!!1
    they will g3tz us!!!1!!

  2. Con-Tester Says:

    Aah, it is good to see that your efforts have not been in vain.

    What always tickles me about such numerological humbug is its sheer ignorance concerning place-value notation and the number system radix. There’s nothing special about decimal except that most people happen to be born with ten digits so it’s a convenient base to work in. Imagine all the “coincidences” about “11″ that would obtain in binary, where “11″ is more familiarly 3! On the other hand, hexadecimal is more compact and uses more symbols so overall there’d be fewer “11″ pairs, and the mystical 11 becomes the mundane “B”. It’s a good thing for humans’ sake that computers aren’t conscious or self-aware. They’d laugh at us.

  3. residentRsole Says:

    Being a computer scientist, this is how I interpret these photos:

    112 = 310

    2001 becomes 2+1 = 3

    It’s a sign !!!!!!!

  4. residentRsole Says:

    Crap ! Substrings don’t work here. Okay, let me rewrite that:

    11 = 3
    2001 becomes 2 + 3 = 3

    Gettit ??

  5. At last, the battle has been 1.

  6. If any one is bored enough they can come up with all sorts of stuff with numbers- I once come up with seven things about FFVII that each had seven point of reference. Not to mention there are seven titles in the ‘Compilation of Final Fantasy VII’ game series.

  7. I think this is the best “11″ site yet!

    You have to check it out, and surf around the rest of the Woo pages.
    Maybe even join the WooWoo club!

    http://www.woowoo.org/1111%20Window.htm

  8. Memetic Says:

    This may be a little off topic but is still relevant. I recently had a riveting conversation with a creationist. He offered me this little gem of evidence in favour of demonstrating the existance of dinosaurs in the last 1000 years and hence disproving evolution!!!

    http://s8int.com/dinolit14.html

    Here is a scathing response from a non-believer

    http://dinocreationistsfairytale.wordpress.com/2007/01/19/the-stegosaurus-carving-that-isnt/

    The creationist in question apparently has 1000s of such examples. Anyone up for an evening of debunking?

  9. Con-Tester Says:

    Memetic: Wow and eishh, talk about contriving evidence! Will the stupidity never cease!? See, this is exactly what makes these loonies so tiresome: their limitless ingenuity in getting a peg of any profile to fit into a hole of arbitrary cross-section. Wayne Herschel, a local (SA) chucklehead, thinks that Angkor is actually a starmap (along with numerous other monuments of the ancient world, including Vatican City and Cydonia on Mars) that points the way to a star near the Pleiades where he thinks humans’ ET ancestors/progenitors came from. On the other hand, Wiolawa thinks we are beset by lizard aliens, and lizards, being reptilian, are related to dinosaurs. If these three theories are all correct, it seems then that we humans were created by once benevolent ET omnireptiles who taught us all we know, including architecture and civil engineering. Later, after they went back home, we must have pissed them off somehow and now they’re back, trying to get back their rock in the sun. Being cold-blooded sucks.

  10. residentRsole Says:

    Have somebody actually thoroughly debunked Wayne Herschel or are we only concerned with the “Face on Mars” thingy ? I did a little googling and all I could find were skeptics that focused on the Cydonia issue.

    I think that there is a difference between being a skeptic and a person who simply dismisses anything because it sounds crazy. The reason why I say this is that I just listened to a debate between Richard Dawkins and a former atheist. The former atheist turned to Christianity. Why did this happen ? In my opinion, it is because he simply believed that there was no personal god without ever thinking about it deeply. He may as well have been religious – which he became anyway.

    I am often think about how the scientific community went to great lengths to show how manned heavier-than-air flight was impossible, only to be proved wrong by the Wright Brothers. Or Goddard, the father of modern rocketry. The scientific elite simply dismissed them as they dismissed genuine crackpots without examing their claims. What is the man in the street supposed to conclude about the scientific establishment ?

    I believe that a skeptic must be pedantic in their examination of a claim, however crazy. I always viewed this blog as a way to educate the public but how can we educate the great unwashed if we simply dismiss something without giving the reasons why ? How is Joe Public going to know why there are no reptilians ruling the earth, or why there is no face on Mars, or why John Edwards is a douche bag ?

  11. Skepticism is a position, and it’s a position that says ‘show me the evidence’. The more outlandish the claim, the more evidence is required. And the burden of evidence falls squarely on the person presenting the outlandish claim.

    It is intellectually dishonest to claim that just because the ‘scientific elite’ were hesitant to accept a ground breaking paradigm shift, that somehow this invalidates all of the science ‘establishment’ to the man on the street. You fail to mention that these paradigm shifts – heliocentrism, manned flight, rocketry, special relativity, dark matter – are themselves perpetuated by scientists. Because science is a transparent affair, even when some scientists submit to human weakness, there will always be others to provide the evidence to justify a shift in thinking. It is a self correcting discipline. In every example you gave, the ‘crackpot’ became the new ‘establishment’ by providing irrefutable evidence, not by mere virtue of being a crackpot.

    If you want me to explain why i believe something, then ask. Primarily, whatever visitors may think, this blog is just a place for me to vent about things that irritate me. There are plenty of other resources out there that seek to explain to John Q Public why certain positions are idiotic. You may want to consider the fact that, most of the time, John Q Public doesn’t really want to know.

    To answer your questions: In the case of the face on mars, the only evidence is in the form of a fuzzy photo, which has been superseded by photos of infinitely better quality proving it to be exactly what it is – a rather boring butte and a trick of the light, combined with the human tendency to see faces with the merest suggestion of two depressions and a slit. Therefore we shall mock those who continue to believe it is anything else.

    John Edwards is a douche bag because he demonstrably uses the time-honoured techniques of mentalism – hot and cold reading – to fool desperate people into thinking he’s talking to their deceased loved ones. He has never given any solid evidence that he is really talking to dead people, and there is plenty of evidence that he is not. Therefore we will dismiss him as the douche bag he is.

    And as far as the claim that there are reptile aliens walking amongst us, proof of this would be very simple – provide us with an alien to examine. Find their craft. Intercept their signals. Yet nothing but speculation, accusation and anecdote are put forward, and in the case of Wiolawa, sheer stupidity. You don’t even have to be a skeptic to see that there’s nothing to these claims. But even if you did, it’s not the skeptic’s responsibility to prove that they are wrong… it’s the claimants’ responsibility to prove that they are RIGHT.

    As to Wayne Herschel, I’d have to do some reading first.

  12. Con-Tester Says:

    I’m not aware of any dedicated efforts at a thorough refutation of Herschel. Regarding precursors, i.e. Bauval, to his star map hooey, which is crucial to Herschel’s origins bunk, see:
    http://www.antiquityofman.com/Krupp_refutes_Bauval_and_Roy.html
    http://www.ianlawton.com/oc8.htm
    http://anth507.tripod.com/orionmystery.htm

    The bibliography in Herschel’s book is also a clue the size of Egypt, being a veritable buffoon parade: von Däniken, Sitchin, Bauval, Hancock, Hoagland.

    Also, some of the uncomplimentary reviews (three out of about 20) of Herschel’s book do a decent job of pointing to the flaws in his “theory”. See:

    The problem is that some ideas appear so preposterous to the experts that they receive a horselaugh rather than any considered treatment. The reason this happens is simple. You can be wrong in an almost infinite number of ways, but right in essentially only one, so the a priori probability is already high that an outlandish proposal is duff. And in the words of Sagan, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” What the public generally fail to grasp properly about the scientific method is that the onus is firmly on the claimant to provide compelling evidence why the claim is to be taken seriously, not on the experts to show why it is bogus; otherwise they’d spend their lives doing nothing useful besides debunking.

    The other point to remember is that, where a valid idea is initially dismissed as folly, the required (extraordinary) evidence was eventually produced. This goes to the heart of science: it is self-correcting, and the truth will out, even if we occasionally throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. Robert Milton published his breathless Alternative Science diatribe bemoaning the scientific orthodoxy’s conservatism and resistance to new ideas without properly considering these issues. And the nature of crackpots hosts an unshakeable tenacity, which, when engaged, only serves to waste more of the debunker’s time.

    In Herschel’s case, his narrative is peppered with “amazing coincidences” that are rather more the product of a fervid imagination than that of any actual evidence, say a stone tablet that speaks of space travellers or of the pyramids being sited so as to map the stars, or an alien or anachronistic artefact, or a significant genetic attribute inexplicably unique to humans. This has been pointed out to him more than once, yet he still insists that critics must demonstrate why he is wrong. He ignores the profound scaling and orientation problems with his star maps, and relies instead on his and others’ brains’ propensity for pulling patterns, kicking and screaming if need be, from chaos. If court cases were judged with a comparably blithe approach to evidence, well, suffice it to say that society would be much the worse for it.

    Finally, it seems to me more profitable to show the interested layperson generic methods of identifying baloney, rather than pointing out all the flaws in a case-by-case manner. That is not to say that treating individual cases cannot be instructive, though.

  13. Con-Tester Says:

    Szhplug, a gremlin! The link to reviews of Herschel’s book should be:

  14. residentRsole Says:

    Con-Tester: Agreed. Thanks.

    moonflake: I wasn’t actually attacking you. Sorry if I gave that impression. I think that you have given enough references for interested members of the public to look up in addition to your rants – which I find amusing most of the time.

    Yes, one can take the position of “show me the evidence”. But I don’t think that a skeptic should insult and ridicule as well. But at the same time, poking fun at those who continuously refuse to listen to reason and straightforward rebuttals is okay, I think, although I don’t alway like it (but then, I don’t have to read it).

    I have been reading one of Dawkin’s books and listening to his debates over the past few days. The one with the former atheist continues to disturb me.

    I use the phrase “scientific elite” in the same spirit that Eisenhower did in his final speech.

    I didn’t quite claim that just because the ’scientific elite’ were hesitant to accept a ground breaking paradigm shift, that somehow this invalidates all of the science ‘establishment’ to the man on the street. I am going to expand on my statement regarding the conclusions that the man in the street might reach regarding the scientific community to show what I meant.

    It is my understanding that much of scientific research is funded by the tax-payer. Being a tax payer myself, I will hold the (tax-funded) scientific community accountable. I am sure that you would not want to be rebuffed by arrogant, government-funded scientists if you demanded to know the value of their research. I quote Feynman from his Cargo Cult Speech:
    For example, I was a little surprised when I was talking to a friend who was going to go on the radio. He does work on cosmology and astronomy, and he wondered how he would explain what the applications of his work were. “Well”, I said, “there aren’t any”. He said, “Yes, but then we won’t get support for more research of this kind”. I think that’s kind of dishonest. If you’re representing yourself as a scientist, then you should explain to the layman what you’re doing — and if they don’t support you under those circumstances, then that’s their decision.

    As futile and idealistic as it sounds, I want to know whether tax money is being wasted.
    (It is also my understanding that, during the times of Goddard and the Wright brothers, the scientific community was not given that much money by governments. Not like today.)

    It is one thing for the scientific elite to be hesitant but it is another thing to *actively* engage in ad hominem attacks. Of course, it should go without saying that most scientists are good people. I am really referring to the nasty and powerful kind. It is my opinion that it should not have been left to laymen such as the Wright Brothers to pioneer manned heavier-than-air flight. It should have been scientists themselves.

    Although science is a self-correcting discipline, I am reminded of Max Planck’s statement about the scientific community: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and letting them see the light, but rather because the opponents happen to die off and new generations grow up that are familiar with it.”

    I often wonder how much further science would be if genuine innovators weren’t automatically attacked and ridiculed by some of the elite nastier members of the scientific community. I am all for refutation but not vicious attacks. I do not want tax money to fund those few arrogant, self-serving scientists who hold up innovation and progress because they think that they know better.

    I am a believer in progress and innovation and it annoys me that a small minority slows it down every time, just like the film studios did with the VCR. I think that all of us here dislike that sort of thing.

  15. firstly, i didn’t perceive it as an attack and if i came across as such i apologise.

    just because someone doesn’t conduct their science in a government-funded lab does not make them a lay person. Science is a method, not a job, and the wright brothers were just as scientific in their approach to manned flight as any ‘scientist’ you care to name. On the other hand, just because someone has a big lab and lots of funding doesn’t make them a scientist. The Discovery Institute springs to mind.

    However, let’s address the idea that the taxpayer should have some say, or feedback, as to what their tax money is funding in science. Frankly, the average tax payer is not sufficiently educated to make a call about whether that money is being properly used, until way after the fact. It’s very easy to sit back and say that taxpayers money was wasted by this and that historical mistake, but that doesn’t put one in a position to judge how it is being used now without detailed knowledge of the field at hand. I cannot know any more than you whether looking for a Higgs Boson is worth taxpayer money, and frankly, whether it has a practical application or not is irrelevant – the search for knowledge is in itself a valuable thing, whether that knowledge can be used to blow up our enemies or cook our food or just increase our understanding of our universe.

    The sweeping generalization about ‘a small minority’ that ‘slows it down every time’ is hardly true. New ideas must be proven before they are accepted, but if the proof is there they will be accepted regardless of some member of the scientific elite getting his panties in a twist about it. I hardly think that Einstein’s criticism of Quantum Mechanics, or Hoyle’s criticism of the Big Bang (both of which were decidedly ad hominem, nasty and powerful) ever slowed its proponents down – if anything, it spurned them on to produce an even greater quality of evidence.

    Let’s be honest… if you don’t trust scientists to decide what is good science, why would you trust the great uneducated masses anyway?

  16. No, your work here is not done!

    When are you going to post again? You are one of my favourite bloggers, don’t stop!

  17. i agree with wyrd. your work here isn’t done. we need more midweek cuckoos!1

  18. OMW, I hate being the only one who sends out the e-mail with proof of its fakeness – we should join forcess. Together we can make the world a better place.

    By the way if you count the number of characters of my previous sentence together, then divide that by the square root of 11, you’ll see the answer is 9.11

    I’m part of the conspiracy you see.

    Mwuahahahahaha….

  19. Hi Moon Flake and Resident Rsole

    Both your names seem to suggest your personality and idealism. I feel inspired to see your comments after this email but I will not waste time arguing if you do not at least check out the basics.

    A friend showed me this webpage when we were googling Wayne Herschels book The Hidden Records as our local Lodge felt this chap might have solved something we .

    We bought and subsequently read The Hidden Records but cannot see what has obviously emotionally attacked you both. It appears you both did not really check out what appears to upset you the most. By running the book down you no doubt relieve your fear that we are not alone in the universe. I guess you couldnt see the simplicity of repeating star pattern found at ancient sites and you would prefer that it just coincidence.

    For starters compare Stonehenge, Tikal and Mars. Is this what you feel has been faked? Google Earth it and surprise yourself then go to a NASA site after google Image searching “Cydonia”.

    As an Astronomer by profession and as a Freemason I tried to find fault in Herschels reason too as I felt emotionally attacked perhaps nearly as much as you both were as the rarity of a nearby Sun-like star conveniently fitting as the x that marks the spot sounded too perfect to be true. There are only 29 G spectrum classed stars within 20 ly distance and two of them fit with Herschels claims. Do the Math.

    Yes they are there, (fits more convincingly by our calculation at around 15470 years ago but data is rough) so too are convincing patterns relatively matching the complicated M45 star cluster. Not to mention the strange human geometry patterns. I havent had the time to check out Herschels human geometry claims but it all seems pretty reasonable and more importantly measurable and perhaps more than coincidence.

    The pyramid layouts by the way are on Google Earth, also Angkor Wat in high res. His layouts are the same as in his book. So what are you claiming he fudged?

    An Egyptian resident Egyptologist I hear is now endorsing his theory (Filming a documentary to radio show in South Africa). The Egyptologist insists all the earliest ancient texts claim exactly what Herschel is theorising.

    But I see you debunk all theoretical publications in this genre… no wonder you attacked this book where an author for once dared to suggest what the patterns might mean rather than post a million questions for readers. Planets are a common thing in our universe and we are currently working on a new equation (like the Drake equation) presenting how many thousands of planets there might be like our Earth with liquid water in our Galaxy. Now multiply that number by how many Galaxies we believe there are and you will probably wet your pants.

    On http://www.thehiddenrecords.com there is a page on all the data on two Sun-like stars that I can assure you SETI are currently interested in targeting. Listen to Coast to coast radio next week for more on this authors theory.

    Seth
    Astronomer (and previous sceptic)

  20. Con-Tester Says:

    Ah, yes, Coast to Coast AM radio — a true bastion of credible scientific information.

    Seth, you sign yourself “Astronomer”. If that really is your qualification and you find Herschel’s book compelling, why do you not submit a paper thereon (in collaboration with Herschel and Lederer if you so wish) to an astronomy journal for publication? Should be easy kudos for you, seeing that most of the work’s already been done. You would just need to write it up properly, and, once published, will go a long way towards silencing us critics.

    So, what do you say?

  21. Any silly idiot can blog damaging attacks… but here is a chance now to stand up to your harmful accusations

    I am the author of the book The Hidden Records.

    An astronomer friend of mine mentioned he recently came across your blogging, while web searching my name. He felt it was in my best interest to draw my attention to it, because you were attacking my character suggesting you were an academic. You appear to portray that my book is in error and false, non-academic, and therefore lacking logic or reasoning, … a “con” so to speak. More importantly you portray that both my co-writer and I are fraudulent.

    If you are inspired to do this because of religious reasons then there is not much I can do to appease your destructive rhetoric, but I am hoping you might have some sort of academic ties or friends with academic ties and can at least challenge me with a fair public debate.

    I’m sure this could be done either at a university venue (as you all appear to be in Cape Town) with some interested media representative present (one who is presently interested in the outcome of this posting) or perhaps more conveniently for you, at the very least, consider a debate on this website so all can review it.

    All my star map images and all my monument positions have been checked but if you want to do this again, it will only be worth doing again publicly.

    My star map theory is merely proposing the possibility that the ancients revered the positioning of their monuments to celebrate what might be the place in the heavens of their flesh and blood visitors… their proverbial human like ‘gods’. Subsequently with all the clues of human like features portrayed I suggest it might also be celebrating the place of human origins. Is this perhaps too uncomfortable to consider or too difficult to reason? It is not just one case appearing, it is many cases of the same pattern and its most important monument appearing thus a little more than general coincidence. My book proposes an alternative interpretation of ancient civilisations beginnings and it does so respectfully using words such as “It seems to be suggesting”… “could this be the message left behind?”… but, in strong cases I need to use the words… “more than likely” rather than arrogantly insisting this is fact and everyone is an idiot like many authors have mistakenly tried to do previously.

    The Hidden Records very painstakingly compares many satellite-researched layout plans of the most famous ancient civilisations, and compares their prime monument layout patterns with actual star photography.

    The sun-like star that appears to be the “x” that marks the spot in question can be scientifically referenced, as can proof of its position and type. All this can now be found on my website. Do you not believe perhaps also the fact that there is an increasing scientific following that Mars once had massive oceans and continents, and may have been a lot more like Earth than thought of before? Would it be too ridiculous to consider one might also find ruins of a lost civilisation on Mars?

    My feeling is that your attacks are based on a rebellious belief that we are alone in the universe and nothing more. I expect you will remove this posting and continue with your false propaganda rather than agree to a fair debate.

    Kind regards
    Wayne Herschel

  22. Hi Wayne

    If you had actually read my comments you would see that the only comment I made about you personally was “As to Waynne Herschel I would have to do some reading first”. All other comments were made by visitors to this blog, like you, who are free to say whatever they want here, like you. If this is an indication of the kind of ‘research’ you do before forming an opinion, I think you have already answered all the questions raised by these other visitors.

    I will not be taking anything down, or removing anyone’s comments, any more than I would delete your comment here, because there is such a thing as free speech. You, and the high horse you rode in on, are welcome to leave if you don’t like it.

  23. PS if you are really interested in silencing your critics, and you are an academic, then you should be well aware that scientific questions are not answered in the arena of public debate, or even in the arena of lay publishing. If you have published your findings in a peer reviewed astronomy or physics journal, please provide references. I will be more than happy to link to them here.

    For example, regarding water on mars: Caldarelli J, De Los Rios P, Montuori M and Servedio VDP, 2004, Eur. Phys. J B 38, 387-391.

  24. Come on you folks, lets have a debate. :)

    Here is the opportunity to challenge my material where others can see the outcome.

    It is not a matter of silencing critics. I like criticism if it is factual and accurate. Fair criticism is also justifiable if people at least read and check out the material then specify detail before passing damaging judgements.

    As an author (not a professor of astronomy or history) a science journal is not the first route to follow if a new opposing interpretation is proposed that goes against general written theoretical interpretation on historical mystery.

    Publishing the theory for the general public is the first step.

    My work is very simple to follow and check out because it recognises simple patterns and clue reasoning that even a primary school pupil can recognise.

    Would any of you sceptics at least do me the decency of debating your negative points on this website? Then references will be provided for each detail that is in question.
    Moon flake… I am not talking about a little water flow on Mars… I am talking about planet wide oceans:

    http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn10389-soil-minerals-point-to-planetwide-ocean-on-mars.html

    WH

  25. So the pyramids a star and the stars a pyramid?

    This is from copyright council of Australia’s information sheet, regarding copyright
    about maps and charts….

    Key points
    • Map and charts are generally protected by copyright.
    • You will usually need permission to reproduce someone else’s map or chart even if you make changes to it or
    add to it.
    • You are free to use the information, ideas and styles found in maps and charts, but you generally need
    permission to reproduce elements that are specific to a particular map or chart.
    How does copyright apply to maps and charts?
    Copyright protects “artistic works”, which is defined to include drawings. The definition of drawings includes maps
    and charts.

    which means you can’t add to them wayne!!!

  26. Hi

    Very interesting information! Thanks!

    Bye

  27. Yes very interesting!
    Your not apperlating are you Wayne Herschel?

  28. Come on sceptic folks… get off your sorry as..s come to my next talk as a group. A debating session will be especially planned after the talk only if we can get some sceptics to commit to speaking their mind. Next event will be posted on my website early Jan in Cape Town.

    I will not only let you in as debating guests…. I will send someone to fetch you.

    I need the footage for a documentary and might consider paying for your time if you present your hopefully partially researched questions.

    Show your readers what you are made of, commit to it here on this site.

    By the way the only reason I am writing here is because I like challenges and there are another 12 completely new ancient sites/artefacts going on line on http://www.thehiddenrecords.com as supporting evidence since people from all over the world are sending in historical recognition of the star pattern.

    A correlating pattern is unanimous that even a junior school child can see is a duplicating pattern… stars matching the layout of the monuments I proposed. Patterns that are celestial celebrations of the place of the ancients gods!

    Strange that the Freemasons and the Vatican obssess with these stars too and three solar bodies that hold a secret there… heavenly objects they refer to as the ancient solar trinity…

    http://www.thehiddenrecords.com/forbidden_starmap.htm

    (yes… I reproduced the masonic image in the link above on my own working with an authoritative SA mason. It took days to reproduce… hence you wont see an identical image anywhere else).

    search Sol Invictus…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sol_invictus

    Three suns – three solar deieites – the original solar trinity – in a triangular arangement… hmmmmmm…

    trinity origin ref – http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/sta/sta11.htm

    symbolism as triangular formation in the heavens…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shield_of_the_Trinity

    The blazing star is the mythological genesis star near the Pleiades… did you know the blazing star in the masonic secret star chart is one that was once celebrated on the 25th December… which later shared tradition celebrating Christ’s birth?

    I am also fortunately working with the most famous Solomon key talisman that Dan Brown’s next book: The Solomon Key… is a star map

    Yes… sorry to spoil your day… King Solomon is linked in with the Earliest Clavicula Salomonis talisman on record (once hidden)… it has the blazing star with beam of light – Orion is there in alignment as the sacred celestial cross and the outer rim is a puzzle that deciphered going anti-clockwise assembles the star pattern of the Pleiades!

    here it is… the on line solution releases next month after UK magazine Kindred Spirit and local magazine Renaissance magazine release their issues first.

    You obviously haven’t seen my book. Every image was produced within strict publishing rules. The images are mainly telescope images of the stars in question. Images taken by astronomer friends and my own.

    The double hemisphere image and the image of Andromeda are the only original sourced images which we rightfully REPRODUCED completely… yes all star positions reproduced on a graphic program. that is why that image is a small one… it is not high resolution.

    I challenge you all one more time: Lets have some fun in a filmed debate… Please consider speaking your minds. Next event will be posted on my website early Jan in Cape Town.

    W

  29. oops… forgot ref for Key of Solomon… earliest Hebrew sourced talisman on parchment (seen at archives ref on the site):

    http://www.keyofsolomon.net

    W

  30. Author: If you were a scientist, you would know that questions of science are never, ever decided in public debate. That is simply not the appropriate forum. Publish your works in a peer reviewed journal if you expect acknowledgement from the scientific community. I suggest Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society – it’s free and highly respected. You are, after all, an author. You shouldn’t have any trouble writing something as short as a paper after having written a whole book.

    Also, I should probably point out to you that since this is a very old post, it is highly unlikely that anyone is actually checking it for your responses. So it’s probably not the best place to make invitations like that, if you actually want anyone to pay attention.

  31. Ok I am asking you the question Wayne Herschel, or more to the people who invest in this book of yours, you are saying the same thing as http://www.apperlate.com is saying arn’t you? you are adding to a map or idea that belongs to someone else, hence my pasting of rules and that regarding copyrights of maps and that using bauvals theory that is very unique and then add even more pyramids to you scam, this is an infrigement of a map isn’t it? and why turn around saying “I realised my copyright was as safe as a cracked open chest of gold coins in the middle of a crowded market square.” this goes against the copyrights of maps and charts, do you or anyone around you understand copyrights about maps, it doesn’t look that way!
    I have written to the author and asked If you had his permission, and all he did was cuss you and your book, he was quite vulger in his comments and seemed to think you had your book on pallets in 2003, 10,000 of them, is that right? why also do you go on about dan brown all the time, and do you know him or somthing cause it was before his book was popular that you were mentioning him?

  32. Oops forgot to mention before you go on about debating about misunderstanding what his map is about it starts in his file that he made in very early in 2002, pi.exe, that was sent to sceptics to prove the relationship of pyramid building cultures that are apparently not connected in anyway what so ever, he also said that he sent these files to robert bauval, graham hancock, and to E.V.Daniken who was advertising your book when you first released it, have you ever met any of them before you wrote your book and when did you appear on South African t.v, was it in March or May because you state on your page March but interview says May, it must have taken them months to figure out what a great revelation of yours or did it just HIT them straight away considering they usually have these fringe authors on thier show, you would think this one of yours is fairly obvious because as you say “a small child could see what you I am saying.”??

    so now can you answer my

  33. Oops forgot to mention before you go on about debating about misunderstanding what his map is about it starts in his file that he made in very early in 2002, pi.exe, that was sent to sceptics to prove the relationship of pyramid building cultures that are apparently not connected in anyway what so ever, he also said that he sent these files to robert bauval, graham hancock, and to E.V.Daniken who was advertising your book when you first released it, have you ever met any of them before you wrote your book and when did you appear on South African t.v, was it in March or May because you state on your page March but interview says May, it must have taken them months to figure out what a great revelation of yours or did it just HIT them straight away considering they usually have these fringe authors on thier show, you would think this one of yours is fairly obvious because as you say “a small child could work out what I am saying.”??

    so now can you answer my

  34. So now can you answer my question?
    I mean since your ignoring my comments!

    KSmyth drinks too much Jim Beam… *o)

  35. As an astronomer and as a member of the worlds largest fraternity that historically based its foundations around the star map seen in Wayne Herschel’s book – and as an investor in the book project of this decent man you are defaming, I make it my business to google his name periodically and check out for web nonsense as expressed by some of the know-it-alls here.

    Lets be straight here – the people obviously joined this site for their strange pleasure they get in slandering absolutely anything on websites like this because that’s probably what makes their miserable lives feel a little better. There is however one individual posting here leaving clues relating to an earlier misdemeanor involving the book project with the investigative work that I have been involved with for a while. I am on to you buddy and I will be watching your IP. I will only be posting one blog here for the benefit of other readers and not feed his sad hobby.

    These hobbyist skeptics futile arguments can be concluded here:

    1. Wayne is an author not a scholar and he makes that clear in his book.
    2. He needed to copyright his material as a theory and the best way to do it is in a publication.
    3. He realized very quickly that there is a movement set to try and stop this material being explored. It is headed by people of the same fraternity as that of which I belong to but with more arrogant and traditional objectives.
    4. Wayne has placed some of the more sensitive star pattern material (that is soon to be released) in his first book in a way it is hard to notice at first glance yet is legally copy written: eg. As seen on p277 in his book.
    5. He therefore was not able to produce a scholarly thesis for this reason and for more reasons that follow.
    6. He would get virtually nothing in proposing a general scholarly thesis.
    7. The extreme book business prospects of his theory would be at risk of being lost to another potential author running with it while it is not yet fully copy written and while it is being passed around from publisher to publisher and then carefully being evaluated from scholar to scholar. It did leak out to another author and our action was taken in stopping usage of it.
    8. Although Wayne just wants to earn a basic living from his decades of research, we investors see it as more. It is a lucrative business prospect.
    9. Wayne is also putting a lot of effort into a charitable cause that is striving to make education free.
    10. We ensured he release it to Carte Blanche TV channel the moment he began receiving calls from evaluating personnel from all over the world while his manuscript was with Random house.
    11. People like me contacted him and invested in his book for moral reasons and as a business deal.

    But what really irritates me in the comments on this web page are the off track claims by people who want others to think they are clever and accurate when they are actually being silly. For example claiming all published maps are protected and cant be ever be reproduced by any other author. One can reproduce any map completely in order to re-publish its important detail. One does not even have to mention the source although Wayne has done so in the most important maps. One literally by hand has to re-sketch each image before a computer presentable rendition is possible. Wayne has done this and we had the images checked out and approved before printing. The photographs of the stars were supplied by astronomers belonging to the same astronomy network that I am a part of. This author has referenced earlier researchers with the right legal requirements and published his interpretations with a respectful tone, ie. This appears to be the solution… this seems likely… this is in all probability is what it represents etc. etc.

    He has only produced a third of his manuscript in his first book… so you cant make conclusions yet. You have only seen a third of his theory. Please note there is a large number 1 on the front cover and the book concludes explaining it is only the tip of the iceberg and more follows. By the way, speaking also as an astronomer, the Angkor Wat interpretation of the Perseus constellation is my favorite. There are more stars matching the layout of the monuments here, by pattern and magnitude to monument size. And when you see how their ancient records explain they were visited by people who came from the stars, saying their temples are reproduced representing the stars; why shouldn’t we damn expect to find the proof that they are really trying to depict the precise stars where their Gods came from with their ultimate monuments? The same story occurs for Stonehenge and Egypt too. It just a theory people, so there is nothing even half near ready to argue about yet. Take it as a controversial theory for now and accept it could all just be a coincidence. Now let me tell you what is coming for the benefit of some readers who might think you skeptics are partly accurate and have done research or have a good point: There are at least another 10 ancient star map records that will be released shortly that will be made available for all to read for free on the internet. Wayne has already set up a carousel on his website http://www.thehiddenrecords.com for six new findings where only the images at the moment are up.

    Four of the most controversial sourced star secret epics are the next subject of Dan Browns new book that was planed to be titled the Solomon Key. By the way, I hear through my network that Dan is being harassed in a very serious way right now and is in hiding although it is very unlikely he will be manipulated or stopped. Dan Brown mentioned over two years ago that his next book will tie in the ultimate secret. It is that of the Templars and Freemasons leading up to the secret LAYOUT of Washington DC, the Vatican, and the secret original Hebrew Solomon Key epic. Google it yourself or get the links from the website mentioned below. All of the above have their foundations built around a star-solar-god secret – all have records of the same star pattern found in Wayne’s Book, and more importantly, all have manipulated people over time with altered versions of very ancient more exacting records that formed the foundations of our religions – where only the elite and members of high society knew the secret while commoners and the general public are not worthy of it. The reason for this was necessary because accepting all nations are equal or even more obvious, that women are equal to men would have to be considered. This occurred at the time society depended on conquering foreigners, trading people as slaves and obedience was required to those of the elite.

    Times have changed and this is the reason lodges like mine are more open about presenting the past as mere history and thus make it available to all as seen on the website at the University of Bradford in the UK. Many will see what follows shortly in this star mystery as still bordering on a coincidence and that it is really also a good thing, one needs more evidence and it is coming. Although it is a pure story that follows, it will uphold equality and human freedom as many of my brethren believed this was the reason we joined in the first place and the time to make changes is now – before Dan Brown creates a huge following of those that think all Masons are sinister. So think a little more on this theory because that is all it is. There in no reason to rant and rave about it because it is just a book that offers another interpretation of our past. I think it is also fair to show readers here a little of what is coming and why it is probably a lot more than just another theory. The story is unfolding now on http://www.keyofsolomon.net website. Yes, Wayne is a part of it and so are we. We will protect it at all costs.

    As an astronomer and as a brother of the largest society on this suffering planet… to find the star of Bethlehem, the blazing beautiful tiny jewel of the heavens, one needs a good pair of binoculars (it is only a magnitude 11 star) a set square and a pair of dividers. The northern hemisphere civilizations celebrated this special viewing day before sunrise on July the 4th. Watch the rising of the three great Magi above the Eastern horizon while setting up your setsquare to create a vertical alignment of view above the horizon. Preset a pair of large dividers to an arc angle of 33 degrees. As you ascend your line of sight perpendicularly heavenwards from the alignment of the three belt stars of Orion (Magi) measure with your dividers 33 degrees from the highest belt star on the horizon (with one arm of the dividers parallel to the ground using the spirit level and setsquare). You will find a tiny star beneath the seven star M45 cluster – the Pleiades.

    This can be measured on a computer star atlas too… follow orionsbelt through 33 degrees of arc and there it is. There is another easier way to find the blazing star in the night sky once you know the basics thereafter measuring as mentioned above. Remember the sacred number sequence 3571 – 3 belt stars align through the 5 stars of Taurus through to the 7 of the Pleiades, then follow slightly to the familiar side to the 1 sacred star. Now google the layout of Washington DC and the Vatican… the sacred pattern is obvious.

    One last thought. Would it be such a bad thing if most of our ancient civilizations were right and that they really were visited by our advanced ancestors who travel from time to time from the stars? Would it be so awful to think we are not alone in the universe and that UFO’s exist? If it is an awful thought… do not look at the website material unfolding in a countdown to its full release on the 4th of July at http://www.keyofsolomon.net.

    Because you will realize everything you have been forced to believe by tradition of society are in fact manipulations designed to suit the interests of the elite while the rest of the normal world lives in a meaningless empty struggle designed for these elite. Watch the online movie Zietgeist.

    There is a Grand all-seeing all-knowing architect of the universe and humanity was not just created by chance.

    Hiram

  36. Whats that got to do with my question? You are leading me up a garden path dh!!
    http://www.apperlate.com uses Orion mirroring on the ground
    …Does wayne herschel use Orion mirroring on the ground?
    http://www.apperlate.com uses rb’s incorrect theory
    ..Does wayne herschel use rb’s incorrect theory?
    http://www.apperlate.com shows cultures to be in contact with each other
    .. Does wayne herschel show cultures to be in contact with each other?
    http://www.apperlate.com uses places like stonehenge in showing connections
    ..Does wayne herschel use places like stonehenge in showing connections?
    http://www.apperlate.com uses stars as a pyramid and visa versa
    …Does wayne herschel use stars as a pyramid and visa versa?
    Do you understand what I am saying????
    I can go out and make a book with apperlate.com’s permission and mention the very same thing as hershel and also add that the same pattern shows up on jupiters surface next to the highest gas ball near the 33 degree placement on its surface, and theres a planet in Andromeda system to the left of the third largest rock
    also showing this star pattern!!! That would be stealing this information, wouldn’t it ???
    You mention randomhouse and dan brown?! Go read this shit!!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Neights
    This is just disgusting, steal from people and leave them in this kind of position so they have to defend themselves in ways never before imagined….
    If you can be bothered there is three pages following that link, but as a lay observer, to me dan brown is a plagiarist and has also committed perjury, is wayne herschel who uses http://www.apperlate.com‘s excact information a plagiarist aswell, or are you going to say that this information is not at all the same?
    Lead me around with your comments again and I won’t bother to reply back to you, so unless you have something relative to say, see ya later.

  37. Hiram you said,”But what really irritates me in the comments on this web page are the off
    track claims by people who want others to think they are clever and accurate when they are
    actually being silly. For example claiming all published maps are protected and cant be ever
    be reproduced by any other author. One can reproduce any map completely in order to re-publish
    its important detail. One does not even have to mention the source although Wayne has done
    so in the most important maps.”………………………..

    Hiram it is not me who wrote this law that I posted about ten comments above this one, it
    is straight from your own countries copyright laws,
    since wayne herschel is called a local (S.A) chucklehead, I take S.A
    being for South Africa, who happens to be a signatory country to the International Berne
    Convention, which makes copyrighted works that are from other signatory countries just as applicable in every country, so if your saying anything about me not at all being clever and i’m just being silly and is off track, you are actually saying this to these parties who have to make people abide by these laws!

    Besides all this information about maps and charts that are NOT anywhere else by the way, but aswell as copyrights with maps and charts also
    this expression of the pyramids being solved aswell and that is also covered by copyright law because it uses this exact information and was done by http://www.apperlate.com
    The same laws apply and it’s illegal for anyone to violate these copyrights that are protected worldwide.
    You have stopped another author from using this! How was this done and with what law?

    Now you know that the blade and chalice information from dan brown’s The Da Vinci Code that show the same image’s to merge to show hidden pictures or codes in them and that also using the same method as the triangles/pictures/code that was used by apperlate thias is all just
    as a copyrightable expression like these maps and the information that was used to solve the pyramid mysterys, aswell these two works seem to compliment each other, W.Herschel
    was even buried in the same place as I.Newton from TDVC story, isn’t he?
    Now you and your network will probably know why dan brown is in hiding, he hasn’t got the money to also pay for the loss of profit on top of all money made from this infringement as that is the right of the copyright holder as he has been called everything from a fraud to a loony trying to prove he is the copyright holder and has had any chance to even
    begin to make any real money from it removed by these people.

    By the way all of waynes information was taken out of Wikipedia, for what reason? because of being PSEUDOSCIENCE wasn’t it? and how can a million editors be wrong?
    I have more to say but am very busy at the moment.

  38. Scott Creighton Says:

    K. Smith: “..Does wayne herschel use rb’s incorrect theory?”

    SC: Can you elaborate as to why you consider Robert Bauval’s OCT to be incorrect?

    Thanks.

    SC

  39. Scott Creighton : “..Does wayne herschel use rb’s incorrect theory?”

    K.Smith : Can you elaborate as to why you consider Robert Bauval’s OCT to be correct?

    Thanks.

    K.Smith

    P.S Sorry but this has NOTHING to do with this post because its about what http://www.apperlate.com‘s owner was using and NOT ME, it is really about
    something different, I know, but from my posts because of what this page
    became I am only pointing out all the expression that was used by http://www.apperlate.com has been used by this wayne herschel, so if you want to ask the owner this question their number is in that file that you can download from connect.to/pyramids.

  40. Mr Smith

    I sense your anguish and that something is really upsetting you mate so I tried looking at your page.

    Holey moley!

    Is apperlate.com your website?

    There’s nothing to click on there mate… its like one big unclickable image. It has a whole lot of DTP errors, broken sentences and stuff trying to get folks to send funds. It refers to Bauval as a professor???.. but you dont show enough material as a sample for what you are selling.

    I did some research and found one of the directory folders and the letters you appear to have written (or someone working with you???) to Random House complaining about Dan Brown and Myself… phew… its really awful.

    From my side the only similarity is the Hebrew six pointed star inside hexagon geometry. This stuff has been in a talisman codex archive in Paris for over 400 years and repeated in many books for decades and there are at least 8 websites I have seen exploring different geometry and interpretation based around this shape. :)

    Folks need to share what you are going through here… it sounds like you have been let down and really messed around…Here are the copies of the letters …

    http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:Uy9Y6oWCvUsJ:home.iprimus.com.au/harris1/index2.html+apperlate.com&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=za

    Mr Smith…

    Please write to me at my web address below… I hardly get time to visit this page or blogging sites.

    I want to try and help you get some clarity and help reduce your frustration.

    I have also struggled (15 years) to keep my findings secure and believe me… you need a clean web site, show lots for free, you need media coverage and investors to carry you because it costs a fortune to copyright valuable material in a publication. The best way to secure valuable stuff is getting a legally strong free TV expose like I did with a big public exposure. It gives you proof with a release date almost written in stone if you have to defend it. :)

    PS… Also all the woo woos, Con testers, flakes and Rsoles (bloggers here on this page) that expressed the same bitterness that I am breaking law or claiming my theory is 100% truth please also write to me at thrbooks@gmail.com and I will respond with respect. Gosh.. if you are respectful I might consider showing material in advance. :)

    It is just part of a bigger ‘theory’ folks… Only released book one (there are three books) lots of it is free so you dont have to buy the book… it is presented respectfully as a hypothesis and that is all it is. :)

    Even my 300 full page glossy paper book is priced so low it competes with rough paper paperbacks on amazon :)

    My work is not done… got a long way to go to show it might be more than a theory. I am just building up to something bigger and more conclusive. It seems to be causing a riff amongst lodges where some masons insist it gets out while some more traditional masons want it kept secret.

    Too late for that now… July 4th release date is near.

    Kindest regards

    Wayne
    http://www.keyofsolomon.net
    http://www.thehiddenrecords.com

  41. P.Harkild Says:

    No wayne herschel, K.Smith is my authorised representative, but I own a part of it,
    I’m just here to tell you to remove my private emails from your server straight away as
    this also infringes on my copyrights.
    But while I am here I want to also tell you that your brain is amazing, it without
    your help figured out that http://www.apperlate.com is just that, one big unclickable picture(gif)
    No wonder you cannot see the similarities of these copyrights that are shown to SOLVE THE
    PYRAMIDS by both of us! and I spin out a bit that you have never seen it before! you and
    you have people for you trawling to search the internet to find shit about you, but you
    have never heard of apperlate.com before 2 days ago?
    Thats funny she linked this on her comment earlier here in 2007:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/stoke/content/articles/2005/05/17/shugborough_code_feature.shtml
    and you have never seen this http://www.apperlate.com page before?

    and she also linked to this one a year later on June 2, 2008 at 10:51 am

    http://www.apperlate.com/

    and you want me or someone else to believe this that you have never come across apperlate.com
    before?
    not that it matters, everthing that I copyrighted was done in Feb 2002 I just didn’t show
    it to sceptics till a certain date in 2003, also I have a lot of witnesses, UNDERSTAND?
    I have given randomhouse and dan brown a chance to sort this out as you can tell (they blew
    it) by the way.
    So unless you prove to me by providing me with a bit of information proving that you were
    doing this PROVING THAT YOU ARE SOLVING THE PYRAMIDS prior my dates you and your attitude
    are leaving me no choice other than to take action agaist you as all you seem to do is avoid
    questions about dates and ignore me in e-mails(thats why I went public) and while I am
    thinking about it copyrights ARE FREE, there is NO FEES, and a simple page is adequate to
    copyright just about anything without even putting a notice on it!
    I have got better things to do, so you have till after this weekend to show me(with proof)dates
    earlier than mine showing that you were doing this same thing because as I said you are leaving
    me with no other choice and before I forget you said “I ALSO have struggled to keep these
    copyrights secured
    I only said that on another page wayne, that page your reading never said that?? and the reason
    I didn’t do it sooner was because I would rather be dead than bitch slap otherpeoples
    religions or religious beliefs and was quite happy going to the grave with it other than
    insult a shit load load of people who have inherited their faith, but when I saw 911 happen,
    something inside of me snapped!

  42. Who said anything about money wayne? you said “trying to get folks to send funds” Exploration and donations needed! Information is worth lots more than money! It’s like this, for people who are interested this is a donation that relates to my problem with you, who is responsible for this page that I have linked to? and why would they change two weeks of refering to the pyramids solved it really is a ?, and then change it a couple of months later to GIZA AND MEXICO RELATED??? Now this is a hint to go find out a little more about what was changed and why was it changed and go exploring to find out why finally write about this absolute BACKFLIP regarding this subject! Do you regognise the word BACKFLIP??? as for saying Proffessor I did not!!! < I remisspelt proof. tell this to your lawyer whilst you “try” to throw a suit on me. You can go FY.

  43. Scott Creighton Says:

    K.Smith : Can you elaborate as to why you consider Robert Bauval’s OCT to be correct?

    SC: Sure……

    http://www.scottcreighton.co.uk/Video/Orion-Giza-Blueprint.wmv

    Regards,

    SC

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: