Name Patterns?
Moderator: Moderators
Name Patterns?
Andrea
Bree
Cassie
Daniel[beast]
of course then we're left with Paul...
either way this seems rather interesting and unlikely to be a coincidence.
Also, note the length of the names in question:
Andrea (6)
Cassie (6)
Daniel (6)
Bree (4)
Paul (4)
This seems like it's a coincidence to me, but...
Perhaps people involved in this ceremony plot are 6's, and people who are innocent are 4's? 666? What is 44?
Bree
Cassie
Daniel[beast]
of course then we're left with Paul...
either way this seems rather interesting and unlikely to be a coincidence.
Also, note the length of the names in question:
Andrea (6)
Cassie (6)
Daniel (6)
Bree (4)
Paul (4)
This seems like it's a coincidence to me, but...
Perhaps people involved in this ceremony plot are 6's, and people who are innocent are 4's? 666? What is 44?
Unlikely? I'd say its very likely it is a coincidence.
And its not fair throwing out Paul from your A,B,C,D pattern-noticing just because it opposes your assertion. If you use Andrea, you have to include Paul, and that destroys your noticed patern. I think science needs to prove your wrong about these dumb coincidences.
It's an interesting find, thank you for pointing it out, but its another example of looking too far into something for extra meaning.
And its not fair throwing out Paul from your A,B,C,D pattern-noticing just because it opposes your assertion. If you use Andrea, you have to include Paul, and that destroys your noticed patern. I think science needs to prove your wrong about these dumb coincidences.
It's an interesting find, thank you for pointing it out, but its another example of looking too far into something for extra meaning.
Check out: Funniest LG15-related episode... ever?! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ6kBdNegfs
-
- Casual Observer
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:32 am
Here's the problem with that: given a random selection of x names from the members of some set of names (for instance, all possible names), the odds of an alphabetical pattern emerging are almost nill.HyeMew wrote: Unlikely? I'd say its very likely it is a coincidence.
Furthermore, I am a mathematician and a cryptographer. The reason that I noticed this trend in the first place is that it's a very common practice in my field. Cryptographic exchanges are generally described using variables, however unlike most branches of mathematics those variables tend to be a set of alphabetically ordered (or otherwise significant) names i.e., Alice, Bob, Charlie, David.
What I mean by "otherwise significant" names is as follows: when selecting a variable to represent an evesdropper, the name Eve is generally chosen -- regardless of whether we've reached variable D at that point. Further examples of this trend include skipping all the way to M for "Mal" (often a malicious attacker).
This is not to say that it is not a coincidence. It very well may be. I'm merely asserting that the likelihood of this occurring at random is 1 in 4,503,599,627,370,496 -- which I would not consider to be "very likely."
I whole-heartedly agree. This is why I said "Of course then we're left with Paul..."HyeMew wrote: And its not fair throwing out Paul from your A,B,C,D pattern-noticing just because it opposes your assertion. If you use Andrea, you have to include Paul, and that destroys your noticed patern.
However, it does tend to follow then general cryptographic variable-naming scheme -- if that or some similar schema is, in fact, being used in this case.
As a scientist (assuming that you consider mathematics a science), I suspect that the above-defended assertions are not "dumb coincidences." I will gladly say (as I already have) that the length-of-names trend that I pointed out is highly likely to be coincidence. I merely included it to perhaps aid others' research (generally the purpose of publication -- at least in my community, perhaps it is not in this one).HyeMew wrote: I think science needs to prove your wrong about these dumb coincidences.
It's an interesting find, thank you for pointing it out, but its another example of looking too far into something for extra meaning.
-
- Casual Observer
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:32 am
Even more so, if you think about this "pattern" based on when they were introduced, you get...
Bree, (P. Monkey), Daniel, Cassie, Paul, Andrea.
I think that throws another wrench in the assertion there's a meaningful pattern here, as the names aren't even in alphabetical order. If this had been last week, we would have only had the B, C, D part of the alleged pattern, making it completely impossible.
Bree, (P. Monkey), Daniel, Cassie, Paul, Andrea.
I think that throws another wrench in the assertion there's a meaningful pattern here, as the names aren't even in alphabetical order. If this had been last week, we would have only had the B, C, D part of the alleged pattern, making it completely impossible.
Check out: Funniest LG15-related episode... ever?! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ6kBdNegfs
Look into Crowley a bit more... I'd suggest reading 777 And Other Qabalistic Writings.steamywndr wrote: okay, I'll give you that, but WHY? why an abc pattern? just to show there is a pattern? That seems lame.
Crowley was all into patterns of this sort, codes, numerology, etc. If it weren't for the Crowley theme along with various hidden clues I wouldn't think such a pattern would exist in the first place.
Here's a link to the book: http://www.amazon.com/Other-Qabalistic- ... 0877286701
So, are you saying these names couldn't have been selected by the writers prior to releasing the videos?HyeMew wrote: Even more so, if you think about this "pattern" based on when they were introduced, you get...
Bree, (P. Monkey), Daniel, Cassie, Paul, Andrea.
I think that throws another wrench in the assertion there's a meaningful pattern here, as the names aren't even in alphabetical order. If this had been last week, we would have only had the B, C, D part of the alleged pattern, making it completely impossible.
You'll often see a diophantine equation in the form:
b = ac + kd
Is that to say that the existance of a, b, c, and d, are merely coincidental and weren't selected in some order despite the fact that they don't necessarily APPEAR in that order in the problem?
That is clearly a fallacious argument.
-
- Casual Observer
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:32 am
but why? okay, so say there is an alphabet pattern. why??? The pattern for patterns' sake doesn't mean anything.Crowley was all into patterns of this sort, codes, numerology, etc. If it weren't for the Crowley theme along with various hidden clues I wouldn't think such a pattern would exist in the first place.
I agree, work on the tags they seem to hold more meanings.
steamywndr and solasura,
please feel free to work on the tags all you want. i've actually thought of it as well, but haven't taken the time to compile a list of all tags used correlated with the video release.
if such a list exists, i'd gladly look it over.
EDIT:
I have now compiled this list, it's located here:
http://lonelygirl15.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2074#2074
please feel free to work on the tags all you want. i've actually thought of it as well, but haven't taken the time to compile a list of all tags used correlated with the video release.
if such a list exists, i'd gladly look it over.
EDIT:
I have now compiled this list, it's located here:
http://lonelygirl15.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2074#2074
Last edited by dave on Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Casual Observer
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:48 pm
-
- Casual Observer
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:48 pm
I've been 'watching the watchers'solasura wrote:where did u get that from? hoho. looks complex.

If after it's decrypted we find it's in any way relevant I'll post where it came from.
Last edited by JesusLives on Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.