The Hidden Mission Forum

Full Version: Washington: District of Cydonia
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
photoshop -

Quote:Background



Quote: [Image: Greenwich_meridian_20040512123830.gif]

However, there are places where it can be visibly identified. The best known of
these is at Greenwich itself, where the Prime Meridian, as defined by Airy, is
marked by the brass strip at the Observatory site - the spot where people are often
photographed straddling the eastern and western hemispheres. Several other
features, plaques or markers have also been placed by individuals, societies and
authorities at various other points along the route.

One meridian marker, The Chingford Pillar, was erected in 1824 on the edge of
Epping Forest on the earlier Bradley line. A plaque on that pillar indicates that
Airy's later definition set the Meridian 19ft (5.79m) to the east - a point also marked
by an obelisk. Like the Chingford Pillar, significant features marking the Meridian at
Cleethorpes and Peacehaven are also based on the Bradley line, as are many
other smaller `Meridian markers' in the country. However, in recent years, new
markers have tended to be based on the Airy line.

http://www.gpsinformation.net/main/greenwich.htm


distance 33.9 miles

has anyone looked at an overlay to see if there are any significant ruins at this location?

how 'bout this one
monument to sunderland
location of routes 2 and 4 splitting
33.1 miles apart

maps
[Image: 2271257009_f9c804dc75_o.jpg]
Lonesometrail
Quote:Yesterday I put together a near-perfect mosaic of about 100 Google Earth screen captures to have a higher resolution view of DC to measure, and I don't seem to be finding any of those rumours stated above to be holding true, sorry.

It really was impressive in a low resolution image, though - I was hitting remarkable things that I was not trying to aim for - but apparently it's just not accurate.

Bullshit.
Swordfight
You Spoke it...I think it is reasonable to ask an image from you at a third the effort you already expended anyway.

It wouldn't kill you... Rotatingheart
We'd Luv to SEE IT.
Quote:[Image: 2271257009_f9c804dc75_o.jpg]

paybacks are HELL

Glycon lover

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbCdLloQ ... re=related

<img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/rotatingheart.gif" alt="Rotatingheart" title="rotatingheart" />
Sheep
Quote:I think the put up is challenging if I dare say.
<img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/swordfight.gif" alt="Swordfight" title="swordfight" />
You Spoke it...I think it is reasonable to ask an image from you at a third the effort you already expended anyway.

Anyone recommend some cheap, halfway reliable image hosting? We got a "whopping" 8 megs with our Internet, all of which is pretty much spoken for and they refuse to sell us more (go figure), and other than that I'm a noob at shopping for hosting (and everything I pick for free hosting either takes my stuff down or locks me out).

And this forum doesn't take attachments apparently, yes/no?

I could maybe tidy up the first pics I studied and made bad pronouncements from, and stick up a bad jpeg, but I'm not sure what that's worth other than showing where I went wrong. The rest is pretty much out of the question as things presently stand.

I will continue to look, though, when time allows, and you can probably tell I'm too happy to announce what I find even before I know what the hell I'm talking about :-)

Not sure what is with the rest of it, though - I freaking know D.C. is Freemason Disneyland from the air, but - maybe I need more sophistication to find meaning in things that don't really measure out at 19.5* or 33* when you get close up.

Currently I'm dinking around with the geometry of that inverted pentagram over the White House - I don't think it's by chance, obviously, but apparently I haven't poked it in the right places to tell what it means. That, maybe I can post a .gif diagram if I have any breakthroughs.
Okay, here's what I mean by it looks like (emphasize "looks like") the location of the USNO circle might be based on the geometry of the inverted pentagram.

I'd take the "33 degrees" marker with a huge grain of salt also - I should have faced up to the job of the huge mosaic in the first place instead of trying to get shots that include a lot of stuff and don't measure right. The other two (also very dubious) marked angles shown are @ 20.7* and @ 20.8* - that's about 120k for the .jpeg and the text is still bleeding like crazy. I definitely need to go back and see if the total of those angles agrees with what the "absolute" geometry of the inverted pentagram seems to be but I don't have that in front of me right this second.

[Image: dc_dinking1.jpg]

On the shot with the Pentagon bldg (same eye level of 16642 ft), I seem to have neglected to click on a new layer when I marked it up, so that one's going to be a do-over from scratch - there's no tidying that one up when the whole mess has been accidentally saved as a single layer.

Also a word of warning to those trying this at home (please do try this at home) - the reason I have a near-perfect mosaic of Google Earth captures is because apparently if you don't pan to more or less adjacent areas consecutively, it starts putting out imagery with a slightly different orientation for some reason. It is possible to do a perfect mosaic - if you put on a new section as a new layer that you can toggle on and off, the human eye will easily spot a movement back and forth of 1 pixel if the layers are misaligned by that much.

I used Daniel Perez's diagram as a reference for where the Geo. Washington Masonic Monument was and ended up missing it by a little, and when I opened up Google Earth again and went to get the missing bits they didn't quite align right with the previous bits. That may increase the uncertainty of some of D.C's geometry with respect to North and South very slightly also.
Okay, here's a really sh*tty job of re-doing a really sh*tty job... Once again, please don't mistake what's implied here for the reality. I will re-check the higher res stuff again just for fun, but offhand I'd be pretty sure that this is not the reality when measured more carefully...

But this is the bulk of what I meant about taking the "appropriate" angles off the sides of the Pentagon (I didn't do the math to get the exact angles for a normal pentagon's sides -- the sides themselves came out at about 17* and 18* from the center line here), but I did try to be careful with a similar pic of the same resolution that was a little more helpful than this one (i.e. the whole S side of the Pentagon was in the pic originally used, but I can't find an unmarked version of it that I saved).

[Image: dc_dinking2.jpg]

It is pretty tempting that this cheap stunt does manage to nail the Washington Monument, which is narrower than the broad side of a barn in real life...

But I'm pretty sure that Illustrated Crazy Internet Guy Rumours are still just that, though - just rumours stated by some crazy dumba$$ on the Internet.

I could start another rumour that the satellite guys might have just so happened to catch our beloved national 555-foot high obelisk casting a shadow at 55.5* S of N, but that and $3.50 will get you a cup of coffee, know what I mean? - especially when I haven't really double-checked :-)

Like I say, I should just shut up if I'm not sure I'm going to be able to put up.
BTW, here's a thingie I tripped across while pasting together Google Earth captures. No idea what it is, a trailer park for Masons maybe? :-)

And I haven't checked it for "significant angles" in relation to anything else. Those so inclined (and quite likely better qualified than me), go for it.

But it is noticably geometric and I can't remember anyone having mentioned it before (not that that means much).

You can hopefully see where it is in relation to the Pentagon (Pentagon at near to upper left corner) from the clip rather than me having to figure out how to get a Google Earth placemarker in a post.

[Image: dc_thingie.jpg]
Okay, just to prove a point... (Well, actually this doesn't really prove anything, does it? Yea or nay, it should be independently verifiable and independently verified, and not just me saying this or that, correct?)

Anyway, the 100 part mosaic would be kind of pointless, it was meant to get coverage of most of the area in the Perez stuff, I didn't get that hi-res with many smaller areas. The process did wipe out most of a Sunday, though, and didn't leave me as much time as I'd like for working with the results.

The mosaic has an eye altitude of 4910 feet (as does this clip), but it looks to be adequate for dealing with the geometry better - at the same level the inverted pentagram gives almost unanimously whole-numbered angle values.

I did another mosaic of these same features at an eye altitude of 1980 ft (will not be appearing here due to exhausted server space), but I think the results are pretty much the same, and I kind of doubt that throwing 33.3* instead of 33* in there is going to make it work perfectly.

You might want to count this as a hit on the Lincoln Memorial anyway, but I can't catch the projected line actually passing through the center of the building itself anymore at this resolution, and if I figure the sides of the Pentagon to be angled correctly at 18* off of the center line, it's just going to move the projected line further away from the Lincoln Memorial building.

(For what it's worth, I did nail the Washington Monument dead center again on this round, but it still didn't happen at the highest resolution I used. Also for what it's worth, on the re-try I did nail it again at eye altitude 1980. Arrgggh, will these monuments kindly hold still? I am confused). <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/meds.gif" alt="Meds" title="meds" />

Labelled angles (yellow) are 10*, 28.1* and 45.7* and the other two lines are calculated 33* off of the sides.

[Image: dc_provepoint_ea4910.jpg]
I don't know if it has any bearing on this great mysterious cloud of almost, but this area has been subject to cartographic hanky-panky in the past. The Washington Monument is a USGS benchmark (the kind of thing they are supposed to know the location of, precisely) and the benchmark data (available from geocaching.org) does not put it where the maps and aerials put it. They didn't seem to notice this even when they used the Washington Monument for testing altitude readings by GPS back in the 90's and took on the matter of whether it was really "555.55" feet tall, I found a gubbmint page telling about the project results that was still quoting the buggy benchmark data

I would of course have to double-check it, but you may well find the same thing here:
http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/INFO/Washmon/info.htm

Also the USGS 1:24,000 paper map sheets for the Pentagon and White House not only don't fit together perfectly at their seams as they should (you might be able to find some evidence of that in Topozone, not sure http://www.topozone.com/), but the Pentagon map seems to be at a slightly different scale or something. They are the worst mismatch I have ever seen in USGS topo maps. I have no idea what the point of that was - "we don't mind you Soviets lobbing an ICBM at D.C., but we'll have the last laugh when you miss by 75 feet"? - but it's a cartographic oddity for this area anyway.

(These facts plus $3.50 will also get you something at Starbucks, unless someone is able to make real sense of them).

Or maybe this whole nutty thing really was designed on a smaller map and didn't quite translate in reality perfectly because of it. I dunno, really. It would certainly be meaningful if the Pentagon was placed according to some grand and demonstrably pre-existing plan - certainly good for the "District of Cydonia" theory if the earliest of these monuments was set in relation to a five-sided thing that wouldn't show up until over 100 year later - but for some reason everything I do with it comes out almost rather than "smoking gun"...

Regarding the triangular area extending NW from both the Pentagon and the D&M Pyramid, that I need to be more careful with. The terrestrial D.C. version is actually a complicated set of off-centered stuff. I was making reference to the boundary on the grassy area when I took an angle measurement at good resolution, but I didn't actually have the Pentagon itself in the clip I was working with, so what exactly we have there, I'm not entirely sure yet, sorry.

So there you go, some possible leads, that's all. If you understand illumination angles or emission angles, you are 100 times as qualified as me to make these determinations - make that 500 times more qualified if you have any image hosting.

The next challenge I want to take on really, is trying to figure out the geometry of that National Satanic Embarassment that the Prez stands at the apex of, every time he pees off the back porch. Since I don't have a handbook on Satanic Embarassment Analysis, it's kind of a time-consuming do-it-yourself process. :-)
[Image: WashingtonHead.jpg]

Independant confirmation is a hallmark of reproducable results and confirmational data.
Worship
Any American would recognise Independent Thought...That is why you have Independance Day.
Think about it.
Debunk Cydonia Quest all ye who have the countered debate in hand.

Pffffft...
Poof dust is the mess created by BLOWHARD schills.
We don't waiver one iota,we correct for all abberations and here we use Proprietary info and we have our own division of technical and applied optics.
We get the true story and the money-shot.
As Individuals the results to the pimps is all in the residuals.
But the Habitual Ritual supplys us with mojo HIT y'all.
Okay, I think my work is correct here (of course, I think a lot of stuff)...

http://webpages.charter.net/robinmcc1/a ... t_emb.html

No idea what it all means, but there might be an iceberg to see the tip of?

BTW, if anyone else wants to poke around with what might be "Masonically" oriented in relation to the Pentagon, I have now attempted the math - funny thing sitting here with a copy of Robert Lawlor's "Sacred Geometry: Philosophy And Practice" and the bulk of pentagonal geometry was STILL a do-it-yourself proposition - and I'm pretty sure the sides of a regular pentagon should indeed be 18* off of the center line.
Washington D.C/the Pentagon is a legacy of the times when Cydonia was inhabited. <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/damned.gif" alt="Damned" title="damned" />
Why is that site titled about satanism?

If anyone knew anything, its that the pentagram does not orgininate with satanism, and just for the heck of it the swatisca does not orginate with the Nazis either.
Mostly because of my backwards sense of humor - there's a little bit of the tongue-and-cheek there in that dry, boring geometry treatise.

Of course, there are those who really do seem to go ballistic at anything with a pentagram on it - particularly an inverted one - and if they want to sit up and take notice of the big one hovering over the White House (I think it's kind of ironic that they don't), I wouldn't turn down their assistance scrutinizing D.C. :-)

Meanwhile, at this hour, the quest continues to explain why some of D.C.'s features almost fit the pattern of 19.5* and 33* alignment angles - it looks possible that some of the near-alignments from the Pentagon's sides may actually be fulfilled by different alignments.

Also, I can't seem to rule out the possible 19.5* angles of the streets off the Capitol Building quite as quickly as Bob Harrison does - wondering if maybe he got ahold of something with a bad aspect ratio or something. Both of the scanners I've owned seem to refuse to scan the 100 x 100 meter grids of British maps at a perfect 1:1.
Quote:Mostly because of my backwards sense of humor - there's a little bit of the tongue-and-cheek there in that dry, boring geometry treatise.

Of course, there are those who really do seem to go ballistic at anything with a pentagram on it - particularly an inverted one - and if they want to sit up and take notice of the big one hovering over the White House (I think it's kind of ironic that they don't), I wouldn't turn down their assistance scrutinizing D.C. :-)

Meanwhile, at this hour, the quest continues to explain why some of D.C.'s features almost fit the pattern of 19.5* and 33* alignment angles - it looks possible that some of the near-alignments from the Pentagon's sides may actually be fulfilled by different alignments.

Also, I can't seem to rule out the possible 19.5* angles of the streets off the Capitol Building quite as quickly as Bob Harrison does - wondering if maybe he got ahold of something with a bad aspect ratio or something. Both of the scanners I've owned seem to refuse to scan the 100 x 100 meter grids of British maps at a perfect 1:1.

Had an idea, why not just use latitude and longitude to plot the angles instead of the map itself?
Quote:Had an idea, why not just use latitude and longitude to plot the angles instead of the map itself?

That's a great idea...

Unforunately, I'm not sure if there are many sources of exact latitude and longitude - few of the notable D.C. features are actual USGS benchmarks, and one of them, the Washington Monument, already has pretty questionable benchmark data - leaving the best sources of latitude and longitude to possibly be the maps themselves. At the actual scale of the maps, the smallest error = about 28 feet (1 pixel = 1/72 of an inch; 1/72 x 24,000 = 333.3333333 inches = 27.777777777 feet). I can scan maps at higher resolution than that, but if there's anything buggy about them, the bugs may be magnified proportionately.

GPS is probably more accurate now that the military quit scrambling the signals, but good GPS data is also hard to find - some of it would be because they probably won't let you or me on top of the Washington Monument or the Capitol Building, and some of it is because a lot of people contributing to the GPS data pool haven't figured out the point of accuracy yet - if you can see something from 4 blocks away, you're likely to get the coordinates for the location where they were standing 4 blocks away, rather than the true coordinates for whatever it is.

Possibly the latitude and longitude data in Google Earth has improved enough to be useful, but I'd have to check carefully - when it first came out, it quickly turned out to be something I wouldn't want to use because it was giving some pretty strange coordinates for North American monuments compared to any known data, as far as I could tell.
Next time I go to DC(might be a while) I might try and get mesurements, assuming I have a GPS device.
Can't guarantee that will help, but it might make an interesting hobby.

A couple of tips: if they won't let you on top of something, i.e., like the Washington Monument, try taking readings at all four corners at the base to be averaged into center coordinates later.

Also, always give the mapping datum along with the coordinates, and if working with coordinates from others, never use coordinates where the datum that the GPS receiver was set to isn't clearly stated unless it's something you're able to corroborate with a map later anyway. Some people set their GPS to match the paper map in their other hand for convenience, but for the US some of our maps are still printed with the 1927 coordinates, and 1936 for the UK.

Honestly, the crop circle guys and their mapping - I have no idea how you'd ever expect to be able to return to the same spot later in time and look for odd residual readings or other anomalies.
There are at least one, maybe two US companies alllowed to sell REAL close data of Earth from space and have it annotated with long and lat lines grid. i don't know how much just ONE map of the Washington area might be, especially if you only ordered an elevtronic and NOT a photographic copy of the image.

How much is it worth to you and do you have the buck-a-roos? I KNOW I don't have the bucks.

Bob.... <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/reefer.gif" alt=":uni:" title="reefer" />
Quote:There are at least one, maybe two US companies alllowed to sell REAL close data of Earth from space and have it annotated with long and lat lines grid. i don't know how much just ONE map of the Washington area might be, especially if you only ordered an elevtronic and NOT a photographic copy of the image.

I was hoping. The British Ordnance Survey sells, or has representatives that sell, some pretty detailed mapping. Apparently it's useful for property disputes, when one neighbor has built his garage a smidgeon over the property line and that kind of thing. I expect the price of the stuff probably reflects its usage also. Anyway, I'd figure maybe other gubbmints are involved in similar and equally spendy things besides just the OS.

Quote:How much is it worth to you and do you have the buck-a-roos? I KNOW I don't have the bucks.

Don't figure I have them either. Don't know how much I should read into the Google Earth stuff exactly, but if it means anything that the nice clean angle measures of the geometry that I got for the pentagram give values for Phi / 2 and e', precisely, it may actually be accurate. Maybe some additional points of reference will turn up to help validate the free stuff?
Seems Google does better than these folks...but you can get prints less than $100

http://www.terraserver.com/view.asp?cx= ... -1&styp=AD


Seems even the USGS wants money from PUBLIC financed missions:

http://edcsns17.cr.usgs.gov/helpdocs/prices.html

Bob... <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/reefer.gif" alt=":uni:" title="reefer" />
I'm not terribly sure if this means anything...

But having described the D.C. inverted pentagram in terms of having characteristics of 6-fold geometry (60*) angles and 5-fold geometry, that would be very close to the essential description of the D&M originally given by Hoagland and Torun, as a combination of 5-fold and 6-fold geometry.

In their original model, the D&M's angles include 85.3* and 69.4*.

85.3 / 69.4 = 1.229106628.

[Image: nat_sat_emb14.jpg]

Also the numbers would be starting to drift a little, but the original D&M model also provides angles of 55.3* and 45.1*

55.3 / 45.1 = 1.226164080

I haven't been able to move on to the actual dimensions of the D.C. pentagram - I'm not too sure the Google Earth ruler is giving me the straight scoop.

I have no idea what the D.C. pentagram's geometry would be other than what I suggested, unless I've blunted the angles to 66* and they should have been 66.66* instead.

Anyway, just some trivia - or an incentive to get to know your friendly neighborhood D&M a little better. Looks like Hoagland might have been holding out a little bit on e'/sqrt 5 maybe. ;-)
That is what I think shows the difference Between the SQUARE of Washington D.C.
and all the City that grew up inside of it wich has been changed and Modified as well.
You can Zig-zag a Masons this and a Satan's that,I'm quite sure we all agree.
But the Boundary as originally and as precisely laid out for the Science and astronomy level of the day says it all.

Again look at how The Anomaly AN directly Points itself to D.C. and D.C. waves back to the Square Complex <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/hi.gif" alt="Hi" title="hi" />
Using the Tetrahedral code Hoagland had discovered.

That is Pure Genius on the Part of an InfraRed heat signature on another world.
A buncha warm Rocks doing Trig functions With the Area that Headquarters the Agency that Imaged it.
In the Quantum world did my Looking and therefore seeing this Square cause a change?
I am confused?
How do Rocks do Science???

[Image: animatedsquare.gif]

So to dull any possible pseudosceptical response of not being accurate and Rounding off numbers...

Quote:39 degrees
Sine 0.6293203910498375
Cosine 0.7771459614569709

Compare this to a precise harmonic.

Quote:38.942 degrees
Sine 0.62853337090537
Cosine 0.7777826185113246

Again, general and then specific.

Quote:19.5 degrees
Sine 0.33380685923377096
Cosine 0.9426414910921784

Compared with a precise angle

Quote:19.471 degrees
Sine 0.3333297027634017
Cosine 0.9428103251745084

SELF REFERENCING EACH OTHER.
That is evidence of Artificiality .

Lonesome Trail your screename reminds me of an image of an Oak-Grove I used in another thread.

[Image: WebGroveHikers20070317.jpg]
Billy?

[Image: 2429961085_da6839f937_o.jpg]
Quote:Billy?

[Image: 2429961085_da6839f937_o.jpg]


PLUS or +

[Image: ufo024.jpg]
horizontal(tit)

or

[Image: 29780.jpg]
electric (tit)

EQUALS or =

[Image: titan-from-18k.jpg]

guiding light anyone?

[Image: titan3_f.jpg]

those darn soaps, they just kill me Lmao

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gOW_IFcb3uM

kisses are so SWeeT Mellow
Kisses are as Kisses are.

And squares are yet still Squares.

Angle-fire.
We NEED more from you...



RISE.
Anglefire.
This thread has run itz course and I no longer care to post here within it.
The un-collated evidence in this thread as well as others will suit a majority margin of contributors better,If taken up at the Hidden Message Journal.
I have no need to argue about this anymore as it is factual enough where I crossed that threshold and feel I can discuss much the same in an article or Post starting off without Bon-Bon and billy so I wish all further authors and posters of this thread well .

Spam
Bye.
all is well in love and war
so the story says

understatments never did bother me much either..

it was nice to finally meet U

best wishes to u and yours ...

ah, one more for the road
what do u say:?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OIgECNzjLDI

journal away Applause
Quote:your glass is empty...



[Image: DC.jpg]


WATCH.

-------------------.-
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=7j2DHUw8SZg
==================================


Quote:Who’s to know if your soul will fade at all
The one you sold to fool the world
You lost your self-esteem along the way
Yeah

Good god, you’re comin’ up with reasons
Good god, you’re draggin’ it out
Good god, it’s the changin’ of the seasons
I feel so raped
So follow me down

And just fake it, if you’re out of direction
Fake it, if you don’t belong here
Fake it, if you feel like infection
Whoa, you’re such a f**kin’ hypocrite

And you should know that the lies won’t hide your flaws
No sense in hiding all of yours
You gave up on your dreams along the way
Yeah

Good god, you’re comin’ up with reasons
Good god, you’re draggin’ it out
Good god, it’s the changin’ of the seasons
I feel so raped
So follow me down

And just fake it, if you’re out if direction
Fake it, if you don’t belong here
Fake it, if you feel like infection
[Fake It lyrics on http://www.metrolyrics.com]

Whoa, you’re such a f**kin’ hypocrite

Whoa, Whoa

I can fake it with the best of anyone
I can fake it with the best of ‘em all
I can fake it with the best of anyone
I can fake it all

Who’s to know if your soul will fade at all
The one you sold to fool the world
You lost you self-esteem along the way
Yeah

Good god, you’re comin’ up with reasons
Good god, you’re draggin’ it out
Good god, it’s the changin’ of the seasons
I feel so raped man
Follow me down

And just fake it, if you’re out of direction
Fake it, if you don’t belong here
Fake it, if you feel like infection
Whoa, you’re such a f**kin’ hypocrite

Fake it, if you’re out of direction
Fake it, if you don’t belong here
Fake it, if you feel like infection
Whoa, you’re such a f**kin’ hypocrite

The Frame of Reference.
More Wine???




who is the last one standing in your dreams

your pompous flagrant bullshit has gone by too long

four yoursellfishness will not be forgotten

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FxfMFDS ... re=related

no deed goes un punished
may you remember this forever
as you walk without my hand


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AiYy8cKE7s

fidgets requi\re widgets sometimes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_CKP-82yb4
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9