Semi-randomly picked hot babe who can kick ass, Stacey Travis, is the star of the movie Hardware. Hardware is a personal favorite of mine, because of the most important cinematic reason. A hot chick. With a nude scene. Cinematography obscures it, but a nude scene nonetheless. It also has an enormous scientific mistake in it which reminds me of gematria. She figures out the robot is tracking her with infrared sensors and hides in the fridge.
Oops. It doesn't work that way. Infrared picks up differences in heat and cold. If anything she would have been more noticeable instead of invisible like in the film. The plot is about post apocalypse survival. Without zombies. Or donuts. The robot was purposefully manufactured as population control. There's a scene where Stacey, character name Jill if you must know, falls from a window and other than the predictably of movies assumed to possibly have expired leaving Dermott Mulroney to battle the killer not. Good triumphs over evil and the theme of life surviving is upheld.
TRAVIS=89
STACEY=89
LIFE CELEBRATION=89
LIVING=89
The movie is set in a desert wasteland. Australia has lots of desert. Wollongong is the most important city in New South Wales
NEW SOUTH WALES AUSTRALIA =89
March 8th would be a good day for a life celebration ritual, 3+8+2+0+1+8=22. LIFE=22.
I predict that Stacey will not die on March 8th. There's bound to be other celebrities that don't die on the 8th that are heavily coded with life celebration gematria. Check back here on the 8th. Silly, yes.
Here's the target post that has only slightly more predictive value:
https://web.archive.org/web/20180305094218/http://gematrinator.com/blog/index.php/2018/03/03/next-major-eclipse-sacrifice/
Some of this is fairly impressive. That's the way these things work. It wouldn't see the light of day if there wasn't something to it. But it's cheapened by stretching some things too far.
Good-Tying into 3/8 being between the two eclipses. Otherwise several dates could have the same numerology. Bad-multiplying date digits. Since when did we start doing that and how much stuff was different or wrong in past reports? Really bad - in addition to bringing up the reduced value of DEATH=20, the awkward dropping the 0 in 202 to tie to the date value of 22 it shows that LIFE=22 could be a reasonable conclusion for an open minded person to reach. Closed minded number fudgers opinions don't count.
The real objection is the WHO. Define "celebrity" in this context. Past experience has shown that if a major name doesn't croak off you'll settle for a porn star or obscure rugby player or something. A couple names were thrown out there, but like Bob Dylan stubbornly continuing to refuse to cooperate by dying as predicted it's not likely they'll cooperate on that given day. The playing the "close enough" game with the date can't be done here or March 8th is wrong. So the vague "other celebrity" wording opens up the database to a huge supply of potential croakers.
And once I see what numbers are the "eclipse numbers" encoded I can easily find a bigger list of celebrities that simply did not die. Until robots are programmed for population control more people stay alive every day than die off, it's pretty simple math. It's just like trying to suggest that a football player with a certain two digit number gematria means something for that player's team while every team is going to have a player with that number. It looks like a prediction, but it's not.
I sure hope nothing happens to Stacey on the 8th. Last time I did something like this I killed Rose Marie.
No comments:
Post a Comment