What is Predictive Programming?

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,305
Predictive programming is a concept that seems to have originated with a man named Alan Watt who defines predictive programming as: "Predictive programming is a subtle form of psychological conditioning provided by the media to acquaint the public with planned societal changes to be implemented by our leaders. If and when these changes are put through, the public will already be familiarized with them and will accept them as natural progressions, thus lessening possible public resistance and commotion.” link to the source of the quote

The attack on the Twin Towers is commonly cited as an example of predictive programming as numerous examples of the towers being hit as well as the date 9-11 can be seen in popular media before the event took place. As a result of this, people speculate what else is being predicted in media, but are not able to collect the same common theme of an event before it takes place, and I think this is because the presence of 9-11 was not about predictive programming as it is defined by Alan Watt.

For one, predictive programming as defined by Alan Watt suggests that when 9-11 took place, there should have been conditioning involved that suppressed the effects of the attack. The attack on the towers was subsequently honored by declaring September 11 as a Holiday known as "Patriot's Day" by George W. Bush, and there are still conferences that take place on a regular basis for those who suffer from post-traumatic effects from the event. There is an organization called Voices of Sept. 11 talking about CBT and other ways to help those who are still suffering. There is a 9-11 museum, etc. All of which is a very normal, predictable response to a tragedy of this kind for a nation with an opportunity to recognize it as such. Regardless of how many times this was referenced in media, the effects do not seem to be altered from what you expect to see.

If anything, this could be considered predictive programming to send troops off to engage in military conflict in foreign locations in the same pattern that we have followed at the beginning of both world wars. When the Lusitania was hit, we went to war. When Pearl Harbor was hit, we went to war. However, that is not the definition that we are being given for what predictive programming is supposed to accomplish. In addition to this, it would seem unnecessary to go to the trouble of including this in media when two similar scenarios took place previously in history that required no predictive programming to produce the same result.

In addition to this, I perused a site that is supposed to be a collection of September 11th predictive programming examples, and several examples were not even of the twin towers. It would seem that once the idea of predictive programming was introduced, anytime there was a tall building and a plane, it became a premonition of the attack on the Twin Towers.

There was also an early reference to a 9-11 perfume from the turn of the century was rather interesting. Another reference to a watch with the hands at 9 and 11 was interesting. Most of the old comics with a tower burning, I could just as well have done without. Everything past 1968 is kind of hit or miss for me too because in the US, 911 is the number that we have used to call for an ambulance/police/fireman since 1968. It doesn't really shock me to see 911 used after this point even if New York is being referenced in the process as well because New York is one of the most famous places in the country.

Wikipedia did the heavy lifting in identifying every movie that has been set in New York since the turn of the century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_set_in_New_York_City There are a lot of movies that have been set in New York because of this. New York is the equivalent of London or Paris or Rome in terms of prominent cities in the US and the Twin Towers would be the fourth and fifth tallest buildings in the country if they were still standing. When you consider making this abstract in some way either in a picture or in artwork, it is common to represent this achievement with some comparison like a plane. A plane demonstrates the height and the size of these buildings especially if you are trying to zoom in at the top, which would eliminate the comparison to the other buildings that are smaller in size. An 8th-grade art class would teach you this.

I would consider the reference to Neo's birthdate to be the first real reference to what is sensationalized as predictive programming. His birthday on his ID card is specifically September 11, 2001. Popular media is subsequently flooded with the date September 11th after this. However, there is one other reference to September 11th that is worth noting and is the basis for my own theory for the presence of an unusually significant amount of media referencing this date that there has been no comparison for since. It is the date that they started construction on the Pentagon in 1941. I think that the reference to this date was because of a military purpose and the reason this date was chosen was that of the significance to the history of the Pentagon. It would suggest that the military was financing media, which could consequently be called propaganda. Maybe that is where some of the missing money went.

Finally, I believe that since it is more likely that media references refer to a military operation, I think it is likely that September 11th signified something in regard to data collection rather than predictive programming. September 11th initiated the Patriot Act and NSA collection. Data showed a significant expansion in the year 2002. In 2012, Obama signed the Big Data Research and Development Initiative. 9-11 more than likely has something to do with the Pentagon and gathering data, which is the only legitimate discussion that is taking place right now on the capacity to make predictions, which is by gathering data in order to make them.

I don't know that I think Alan Watt is intended to create disinformation, but his research and definition of what predictive programming is, does not match the reality of what is actually taking place. It seems that people like Alex Jones and David Icke are the ones pushing this concept, and I think that has helped this concept to become the distraction that it has become for those who are seeking to understand the truth. In reality, the definition of predictive programming is really just a hybrid way of saying that there is propaganda and censorship limiting what people are exposed to and that if this censorship and propaganda increase, people won't know anything outside of what they are shown by major news sources or popular media.

This is what we are being shown in many dystopian films, but there are also too many objections being made in the present for me to believe that these dystopian stories are creating an acceptance of a reality like this.

I also don't find anything very mystical about this thing called predictive programming and I think that if there is something else taking that will eventually take place that is predicted in media, the only way to find this before it happens is with some ability to search data for this at a rapid pace. A bunch of hobbyist researchers simply are not going to be fast enough to search through the amount of data that exists in order to develop any kind of awareness of the next situation comparable with the phenomenon of September 11 before it happens otherwise.

Therefore, there is more hype and speculation regarding this subject than most subjects I have encountered within my time studying conspiracies. There is no way to say with any certainty that anything you are shown is another example of predictive programming especially when the primary example of predictive programming according to its own definition, is weak. So as a result of the this, let the speculation commence. Really anything and everything goes in a discussion on this because there is no definitive way to say that what I am saying about the subject is absolute fact, or whether what you are saying about the subject is absolute fact, which kind of makes the whole subject seems like one colossal waste of time, but whatever. You live, you learn.

link to the history of 9-11 in media
 






Awoken2

Star
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
4,398
Yeah oh wise one, you know what your talking about don't you?

Why would an intelligent, articulate man who has a deep understanding of the occult make up a "theory" that had no basis on facts? What would he have to gain by doing that?

Just answer that question without making yourself look like a fool.


 






The Zone

Star
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
2,595
At what point are you going to quit talking down to people? I took a quick look at the link above which is you talking a lot with very few responses. You seem to have a tough time with people skills when met with even the slightest questioning, etc. Maybe you haven't noticed how discussions work or maybe you just have to have a soap box to preach on. People will never be open to what you share as long as you act as you do. And if I recall correctly, you said that you've studied this stuff for less than to years which is not a long time with concern to new or added information and refinement.
 






Last edited:

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,305
Yeah oh wise one, you know what your talking about don't you?

Why would an intelligent, articulate man who has a deep understanding of the occult make up a "theory" that had no basis on facts? What would he have to gain by doing that?

Just answer that question without making yourself look like a fool.


See I wish you would stop with the teenage intimidation. Before I look like a fool. I'm sorry if I think making comments like this and posting of a video of the man that I originally referenced which would logically suggest that I have already read the transcripts for some of his videos, which he seems to have transcribed for the purpose of allowing people to read them rather than listen to them, which I can do a lot quicker; seems a little bit foolish.

Considering that in previous conversations, I specifically asked for a definition and was already able to find this myself. You also never previously divulged the name Alan Watt as a point from which the subject could be researched when I was asking you these questions because you presented yourself as an authority on the subject. So maybe, you need to dial the arrogance back a little bit. The entire time, I have had no objections to a discussion like this, to begin with. It seems to have offended you that I am not satisfied with the information that you are presenting on the subject. Well, I'm sorry, but the information you are presenting is insufficient.

So finding the information for this post took me about 24 hours to do myself from start-to-finish, which is less time than I spent trying to pull any real background or information on the subject from you. Essentially, it was quicker to look it up myself than to bother asking you anything.

You can keep trying to repeat yourself all you want showing your videos as though they have this surpassing authority, but it is irresponsible to research this subject without including an awareness of the significance of the towers before September 11th and all of the other features that would prove Watts definition of predictive programming false. September 11th is not something people were prepared for and even twenty years later, people are not victors over their experience of trauma saying they can move on or behaving in any way that would support Watt's definition.
If you remove this reality, you create biased research that is intended for the purpose of sensationalizing an event, which is the same thing as serving as a distraction from the purpose that the presence of September 11 in media is actually trying to accomplish.

The terms "programming" and "government mind control" make a much stronger connection than this theory that our senses are being perpetually worn down so that we are desensitized from traumatic events, which has no evidence. In fact, the presence of September 11th is probably used as some kind of military signal and it means that government is responsible for producing media in the US.

In theory, this would be something that you could actually prove--that the Pentagon is financing popular media. In theory, this would be much easier to prove than chasing the white rabbit down the rabbit hole and trying to determine what is going to happen next by watching a bunch of music videos. You do not have enough hours in a day to gather enough data, that you would be able to find a common theme within these and predict anything that is going to happen next.

In addition to this, there is a lot of talk about using media to "program" people within the testimonies of victims of government mind control, which is another reason that an association to the Pentagon makes a lot more sense. In each and every instance, the media used for "programming" would have no effect on the average person, so I can only conclude that the notion of predictive programming according to the definition of Alan Watt is some kind of disinformation or distraction. However, this could very well be unintentionally generated because more by the way people have responded than by his motivations themselves.

When people are overwhelmed with the possibility of researching something, they become dependent of people who appear to be trying to do the work for them. He could sincerely be researching something and his audience is just too lazy to do the same and/or question him at some point in time when it becomes necessary to do so. Essentially, people are being passive spectators to conspiracy entertainers rather than vigilant citizens.

For example, Fritz Springmeier specifically details the script that you would go through with a child while they were watching Fantasia. No one else who is watching Fantasia is going to finish watching this movie having had the same experience without the secondary script playing simultaneously.

The Wizard of Oz is mentioned by Cathy O'Brien, a victim of government mind control. Millions of people have watched The Wizard of Oz since it was created and not have the same experience as Cathy O'Brien. So if there could be some aspect that is used for programming within popular media. However, this is still not likely to affect the general population and suggesting that it will on a subconscious level that we are expected to pass through our DNA so that three generations from now, my grandchildren will accept a totalitarian government, is silly and there is no evidence to support that this is happening.

I think people appear to be hypervigilant because of the possibility of predictive programming. This could be called an experience a mildly traumatic experience as a result, but this is self-inflicted because people are not able to distinguish between the presence of symbols and what someone is actually able to predict with the use of media. Even the Pentagon has limitations.

Many people are confusing the presence of symbols with legitimizing the possibility of predictive programming. There are a lot of symbols showing themselves in media. They could be used in programming, but there is no evidence that their presence has the potential for predictive programming without external manipulation by a perpetrator. In fact, there are not many examples of this phenomenon besides the media regarding 9-11 and that is probably because of the involvement of the Pentagon in the realm of popular media signaling some type of countdown for the beginning of a data collection process that would eventually be able to predict behavior that you could try to control a population with.
 






rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,305
Go on then, read it all, that's over 300 posts...then de-bunk me. I dare you.

http://goodf.forumotion.com/t1502-predictive-programming-and-the-music-industry
You literally quoted yourself from another forum as an authoritative reference for this subject when you already have several threads on this forum discussing the subject and in those threads, I have already had direct discussions with you regarding this that you have been unable to provide assistance with.

I have no desire to debunk you either. Like I said, please share your speculation. That is all anything regarding this discussion is without more evidence.
 






Awoken2

Star
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
4,398
At what point are you going to quit talking down to people? I took a quick look at the link above which is you talking a lot with very few responses. You seem to have a tough time with people skills when met with even the slightest questioning, etc. Maybe you haven't noticed how discussions work or maybe you just have to have a soap box to preach on. People will never be open to what you share as long as you act as you do. And if I recall correctly, you said that you've studied this stuff for less than to years which is not a long time with concern to new or added information and refinement.
I'm getting bored with you now sock number whatever. This statement uttered by somebody who "sides" with Aero who preaches from a perch so f**king high that the only time he takes off is for f**king altitude sickness....give me a break clown
 






Awoken2

Star
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
4,398
See I wish you would stop with the teenage intimidation. Before I look like a fool. I'm sorry if I think making comments like this and posting of a video of the man that I originally referenced which would logically suggest that I have already read the transcripts for some of his videos, which he seems to have transcribed for the purpose of allowing people to read them rather than listen to them, which I can do a lot quicker; seems a little bit foolish.

Considering that in previous conversations, I specifically asked for a definition and was already able to find this myself. You also never previously divulged the name Alan Watt as a point from which the subject could be researched when I was asking you these questions because you presented yourself as an authority on the subject. So maybe, you need to dial the arrogance back a little bit. The entire time, I have had no objections to a discussion like this, to begin with. It seems to have offended you that I am not satisfied with the information that you are presenting on the subject. Well, I'm sorry, but the information you are presenting is insufficient.

So finding the information for this post took me about 24 hours to do myself from start-to-finish, which is less time than I spent trying to pull any real background or information on the subject from you. Essentially, it was quicker to look it up myself than to bother asking you anything.

You can keep trying to repeat yourself all you want showing your videos as though they have this surpassing authority, but it is irresponsible to research this subject without including an awareness of the significance of the towers before September 11th and all of the other features that would prove Watts definition of predictive programming false. September 11th is not something people were prepared for and even twenty years later, people are not victors over their experience of trauma saying they can move on or behaving in any way that would support Watt's definition.
If you remove this reality, you create biased research that is intended for the purpose of sensationalizing an event, which is the same thing as serving as a distraction from the purpose that the presence of September 11 in media is actually trying to accomplish.

The terms "programming" and "government mind control" make a much stronger connection than this theory that our senses are being perpetually worn down so that we are desensitized from traumatic events, which has no evidence. In fact, the presence of September 11th is probably used as some kind of military signal and it means that government is responsible for producing media in the US.

In theory, this would be something that you could actually prove--that the Pentagon is financing popular media. In theory, this would be much easier to prove than chasing the white rabbit down the rabbit hole and trying to determine what is going to happen next by watching a bunch of music videos. You do not have enough hours in a day to gather enough data, that you would be able to find a common theme within these and predict anything that is going to happen next.

In addition to this, there is a lot of talk about using media to "program" people within the testimonies of victims of government mind control, which is another reason that an association to the Pentagon makes a lot more sense. In each and every instance, the media used for "programming" would have no effect on the average person, so I can only conclude that the notion of predictive programming according to the definition of Alan Watt is some kind of disinformation or distraction. However, this could very well be unintentionally generated because more by the way people have responded than by his motivations themselves.

When people are overwhelmed with the possibility of researching something, they become dependent of people who appear to be trying to do the work for them. He could sincerely be researching something and his audience is just too lazy to do the same and/or question him at some point in time when it becomes necessary to do so. Essentially, people are being passive spectators to conspiracy entertainers rather than vigilant citizens.

For example, Fritz Springmeier specifically details the script that you would go through with a child while they were watching Fantasia. No one else who is watching Fantasia is going to finish watching this movie having had the same experience without the secondary script playing simultaneously.

The Wizard of Oz is mentioned by Cathy O'Brien, a victim of government mind control. Millions of people have watched The Wizard of Oz since it was created and not have the same experience as Cathy O'Brien. So if there could be some aspect that is used for programming within popular media. However, this is still not likely to affect the general population and suggesting that it will on a subconscious level that we are expected to pass through our DNA so that three generations from now, my grandchildren will accept a totalitarian government, is silly and there is no evidence to support that this is happening.

I think people appear to be hypervigilant because of the possibility of predictive programming. This could be called an experience a mildly traumatic experience as a result, but this is self-inflicted because people are not able to distinguish between the presence of symbols and what someone is actually able to predict with the use of media. Even the Pentagon has limitations.

Many people are confusing the presence of symbols with legitimizing the possibility of predictive programming. There are a lot of symbols showing themselves in media. They could be used in programming, but there is no evidence that their presence has the potential for predictive programming without external manipulation by a perpetrator. In fact, there are not many examples of this phenomenon besides the media regarding 9-11 and that is probably because of the involvement of the Pentagon in the realm of popular media signaling some type of countdown for the beginning of a data collection process that would eventually be able to predict behavior that you could try to control a population with.
Can I be honest? It's just how I roll you see. I got about 7 or 8 lines down this and just got bored...Then I went to water some plants.

Your definitely a bot aincha?
 






rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,305
Can I be honest? It's just how I roll you see. I got about 7 or 8 lines down this and just got bored...Then I went to water some plants.

Your definitely a bot aincha?
You mean you got through about 7 or 8 lines and you couldn't handle someone challenging your perspective so you went to water plants. Let me just make this very clear too, a bot is not capable of creating an article like I just did with the technology available today. You could try to speculate that there is some secret government bot available that is able to do something like this, but that would not be something you could prove.

I don't know how to help you understand this without expecting you to research something other than music videos. Even the most advanced AI that exists and is able to hold minimal conversations lacks the ability to create unique conclusions. As a result, it is not possible for a bot to suggest a conclusion that isn't already existing somewhere within a data library about the Pentagon's responsibility, for example.

In order to support your theory that I am a bot, you would need to find one other example of a conclusion like mine that already exists somewhere on the web, because a bot is only going to be able to access information that already exists. So if the information doesn't exist in a search engine, it cannot be used by a bot to generate an article.

I'm not saying it is impossible to find a conclusion like mine, but I was not able to come across a conclusion like I have introduced. If it exists, it is not something that can be found quickly, so you would assume a very small probability that an unnoticed conclusion was introduced into the data library of a bot that was created to automatically generate articles.

I honestly don't know whether the problem is that you truly don't understand the technological capabilities of a bot or if saying I'm a bot is just your way of insulting me based on what you post. It could literally be either one or both based on the prior discussions we have had.
 






Awoken2

Star
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
4,398
You mean you got through about 7 or 8 lines and you couldn't handle someone challenging your perspective so you went to water plants. Let me just make this very clear too, a bot is not capable of creating an article like I just did with the technology available today. You could try to speculate that there is some secret government bot available that is able to do something like this, but that would not be something you could prove.

I don't know how to help you understand this without expecting you to research something other than music videos. Even the most advanced AI that exists and is able to hold minimal conversations lacks the ability to create unique conclusions. As a result, it is not possible for a bot to suggest a conclusion that isn't already existing somewhere within a data library about the Pentagon's responsibility, for example.

In order to support your theory that I am a bot, you would need to find one other example of a conclusion like mine that already exists somewhere on the web, because a bot is only going to be able to access information that already exists. So if the information doesn't exist in a search engine, it cannot be used by a bot to generate an article.

I'm not saying it is impossible to find a conclusion like mine, but I was not able to come across a conclusion like I have introduced. If it exists, it is not something that can be found quickly, so you would assume a very small probability that an unnoticed conclusion was introduced into the data library of a bot that was created to automatically generate articles.

I honestly don't know whether the problem is that you truly don't understand the technological capabilities of a bot or if saying I'm a bot is just your way of insulting me based on what you post. It could literally be either one or both based on the prior discussions we have had.
......hey heyyyy calm down....you'll blow a chip or something.

I find cleverbot a bit more succinct and just a little bit more interesting...generally.
 






Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
2,040
"Predictive programming is a subtle form of psychological conditioning provided by the media to acquaint the public with planned societal changes to be implemented by our leaders. If and when these changes are put through, the public will already be familiarized with them and will accept them as natural progressions, thus lessening possible public resistance and commotion"

Going by this definition, Im not sure how predictive programming applies to 9-11. But its hard for me to wrap my head around there NOT being things in the media that pointed out the date of 9-11 before 9-11-01. I believe 10 years before to the date, GWB Sr. announced the NWO to the UN (I think) so theres definitely something to the idea.

Theres a video game called Detroit becoming human that imo is an example of predictive programming. The game gives androids/robots humanistic qualities that makes it hard for the (or some) player to mistreat/kill them. And this being around the time that robots/androids are being released to the public slowly.
 






rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,305
"Predictive programming is a subtle form of psychological conditioning provided by the media to acquaint the public with planned societal changes to be implemented by our leaders. If and when these changes are put through, the public will already be familiarized with them and will accept them as natural progressions, thus lessening possible public resistance and commotion"

Going by this definition, Im not sure how predictive programming applies to 9-11. But its hard for me to wrap my head around there NOT being things in the media that pointed out the date of 9-11 before 9-11-01. I believe 10 years before to the date, GWB Sr. announced the NWO to the UN (I think) so theres definitely something to the idea.

Theres a video game called Detroit becoming human that imo is an example of predictive programming. The game gives androids/robots humanistic qualities that makes it hard for the (or some) player to mistreat/kill them. And this being around the time that robots/androids are being released to the public slowly.
The movie iRobot is a subject of discussion regarding predictive programming for the same things that you are introducing about the video game. I was familiar with discussion about artificial intelligence ethics and whether or not robots deserve rights before I was introduced to how this discussion is connected to the subject of predictive programming.

As a result, I am undecided on whether or not artificial intelligence ethics was introduced into popular media first or not. They seem to have been introduced at the same time. It is also hard to say whether seeing androids behave as human has the potential to sway people to accept them as sentient beings deserving rights through the process of predictive programming, which is what the discussion outside of popular media is centered around already.

Personally, I don't see any evidence that this is effective according to the definition for predictive programming. Including the subject of this real debate that exists in the present time, could simply be a concept that has entertainment value for producers of media. Here is an article about predictive programming and iRobot if you are interested. https://predictiveprogramminginmovies.blogspot.com/2008/08/i-robot-2004_23.html
 






Aero

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
5,112
I don't think Awoken likes anyone. So I don't take it personally. My main problem is with criticism that is obviously not constructive. I mean pointing out someones Ego is like pointing out any other universal human trait. And I've never gotten altitude sickness, pretty sure that's not possible.

I on the other hand, know that I like the forum members here. I can confidently state I have no personal opinions about anyone. Because I believe in something called "facts". And I'm not sorry if that makes me seem arrogant. I'm really not sorry for refusing to lower myself, and looking weak because of it. Do we live in a world where facts and the high ground are to be scorned and ridiculed? What the fuck is that!

This whole thread is what I've been trying to get at for what seems like a long ass time. Predictive programming is just another stupid conspiracy money grab. So stop falling for obvious money grabs! It's not rocket science and we haven't been replaced by robots yet. There's real shit we can focus on, and if we direct our psychic energy properly we can get shit done.

BTW I definitely don't mean we all astral project our heads off.
 






Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
2,796
Here is a list of 9-11 "predictive programming" in a few movies. At first I saw those as a way to warn the masses that this event was going to happen. Now I am not so sure.

The most blatant example is Back To The Future:


Another one is Terminator 2:


These movies were in the 80s and the early 90s, way before The Matrix movie. You can deny it all you want but these hints were put in there for a reason.
 






Aero

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
5,112
A hint would denote that something can be figured out. And all we keep hearing about is we should trust yall because... "reasons". And that's not good enough. If there are real breadcrumbs here, than tell us where they go! If you can't follow the breadcrumbs to a logical conclusion, than they aren't really breadcrumbs, are they?
 






Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
2,796
Just watch the videos and you will know what I mean. Quit putting your egos before a genuine interest in finding out the truth. Most people here only care about being right and not interested in learning new things. But seeing as this is a form of social media, I'm not that surprised.
 






rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,305
Here is a list of 9-11 "predictive programming" in a few movies. At first I saw those as a way to warn the masses that this event was going to happen. Now I am not so sure.

The most blatant example is Back To The Future:


Another one is Terminator 2:


These movies were in the 80s and the early 90s, way before The Matrix movie. You can deny it all you want but these hints were put in there for a reason.
The one about back to the future is stretching it a lot. They are combining brief, very, very vague connections between Back to the Future 1 and Back to the Future 2. I watched both movies 20 times when I was growing up and know exactly which scenes they are talking about. If you isolate Back to Future 1, you basically get nothing. The Twin Pines parking lot. Why don't we just say that the show Twin Peaks is also a reference to 9-11?

It is 1:16 and then it is 1:19, so it is three minutes later and both of these are supposed to reference 9-11 if you put one upside down or read the other one backward apparently. Then, that is it. There is some giant leap that the wire connecting to the clock tower that is supposed to be hit by lightning is a reference to a new movie that is being made about the towers in 2015, but that is only if you combine the year that is chosen for the sequel.

The wire connecting to the clock tower is supposed to power the Delorean so Marty McFly can get back to the future. I don't know how they were supposed to change that. Then there is a nine on a building and we are supposed to combine this with the flaming tire tracks that are created when the Delorean is sent back to the future because there is a different way for tire tracks to be presented besides parallel to each other. How this is supposed to create a subconscious reference to anything I don't know.

Then, in Back to the Future 2, the year is 2015 and you could really do a whole lot with the way the world is described from this movie. They basically are living in a smart house without a doorknob. The teenagers use hoverboards rather than skateboards. There is a lot of things that could be interesting to analyze from this movie.

However, the scene where Elizabeth Shue is mistaken for the future Mrs. Marty McFly and his parents come over seemed to be mistaking what the scene was showing. It was not a movie that was playing in the background. Marty McFly father enters the scene a minute ago upside down indicating that this is the way he traveled to their house instead of using some kind of wheelchair or walker. They are entering the living room, where Lea Thompson changes the scene in the window because the suggestion is that in the future, you can choose what you look at from your window like changing a channel.

The window is showing a scene of a garden with two matching bushes. She changes this a couple times to show different scenes, one of which includes a scene from New York City because like I said. It is supposed to suggest that in the future, you will be able to see New York from your window wherever you are with the push of a button, which isn't all that unusual considering approximately 1/3 of the tallest buildings in the country are in New York and it is is something of a fantasy city to see and visit for the rest of the country and even many people in the rest of the world.

Apparently, the older version of Marty McFly's dad being in the scene is supposed to mean that you are supposed to see this scene upside down? I think that is stretching it a little too far considering what the whole scene is presenting. However, these movies came out in the mid 80's and early 90's, and programs like MK Ultra had been active for a long time. So if you were to stretch these references into something predictive of 9-11, we are still focused and dependent on 9-11 for the primary source of evidence regarding predictive programming, and you could attribute these references again to some sort of military endeavor that would suggest that the Pentagon is funding our media.

The reference in Terminator 2 is really weak again. I truly expected something better but a clearance of 9 feet 11 inches is less than 2 feet under the standard height requirement for driving on any road in the US as far as I can find. The place that they are in is relevant as well. In LA, they are called flood control channels according to Wikipedia regarding the scene. I forget what I remember they were called when I was little, but it was something else, but this is not a road that is going to get normal traffic. This is not even a tunnel. It is a somewhat unique feature to the LA area that I haven't often seen in other locations that I have traveled to. They don't have something like this in Washington and so I don't find a clearance of 9 feet 11 inches all that unusual. As a result, if that is the only reference, I think I am going to pass on jumping on the predictive programming bandwagon.

However, this movie was also released in the early 90's after MK ultra has been a thing for a while, and we are still talking about a dependence on the presence of 9-11 references to support the premise of predictive programming. So this could again be referencing some kind of military program that could very well have originated with MK ultra and 9-11 is a reference to the day that they started building the Pentagon, and this means that our media is being funded by the government.

I would also like to point out that creating this thread required learning something new. This whole thread references what I didn't know before coming to this forum. As a result, the only reason for suggesting that no one is trying is trying to learn something is that by learning something new, I didn't form the same conclusion that would gain me entry in the club. Therefore, I didn't really learn anything I guess...
 






Last edited:

Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
2,796
They are combining brief, very, very vague connections between Back to the Future 1 and Back to the Future 2. I watched both movies 20 times when I was growing up and know exactly which scenes they are talking about. If you isolate Back to Future 1, you basically get nothing. The Twin Pines parking lot. Why don't we just say that the show Twin Peaks is also a reference to 9-11?
You are leaving out a bunch of things. One of them being the crucial Lybian TERRORISTS who end up killing Brown on the same event that has the Twin Pines destroyed plus the 911 backwards on the clock. Everything is laid out there, there is no leap to be made.

there is a nine on a building and we are supposed to combine this with the flaming tire tracks that are created when the Delorean is sent back to the future because there is a different way for tire tracks to be presented besides parallel to each other.
Yea there is another 9-11 there and there is an Illuminati eye right next to it.


However, this movie was also released in the early 90's after MK ultra has been a thing for a while, and we are still talking about a dependence on the presence of 9-11 references to support the premise of predictive programming. So this could again be referencing some kind of military program that could very well have originated with MK ultra.
Terminator 2 is indeed MK Ultra programming. James Cameron (the director) could even be related to Ewen Cameron. Seems like this Cameron family is quite present in this business. There is masonic symbolism in the movie also, such as the checkerboard floor in the police cloning scene. Also the movie is tinted in a blue gray color, blue being the name of the first 3 degrees.
 






Top