Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,408 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,536,639
Pageviews Today: 2,232,472Threads Today: 486Posts Today: 12,354
08:47 PM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPORT COPYRIGHT VIOLATION IN REPLY
Message Subject MAJOR QUAKE WARNING ALERT Magnitude 7+ to 8+ imminent 1111 to 113
Poster Handle Jusvistn
Post Content

...


AND WHAT WERE DATES I NAMED IN WHAT I CALLED THE NOVEMBER QUAKE WARNING SHERLOCK???

11/9, 11/11 & 11/13

The ORIGINAL has been ARCHIVED FOR MONTHS and this was simply based on THE ORIGINAL. At worst a typo and forgot to post a reminder! lol

But in fact, there's an ESOTERIC date CODE within an ALLEGORICAL CONTEXT that reiterates and references 11/11 several times as well as 11/9 and also the 113 algorithm I've EXPLAINED MANY TIMES!

Just because you can't comprehend simple date codes and allegory, isn't my fault.

...


....AND 11/9, 11/11 & 11/13

So again, this was simply ONE of SEVERAL TIMES I've posted THE QUAKE WARNING FOR NOVEMBER which has been ARCHIVED FOR MONTHS and BASED ON THE ORIGINAL.

Not my fault you didn't see it even though its been CLEARLY and PUBLICLY posted for months.

NICE TRY.

...


WRONG.

11/8 appeared for the date as well.

If you want to argue semantics about a MAJOR QUAKE being off by 1 day or 20 hours from 11/9 which I warned as a TARGET DATE/KEY QUAKE WINDOW for a MAJOR Quake to occur, thats up to you, but it doesn't by any stretch of your imagination, invalidate or disprove what I've explained.

...


being "OLD" has nothing to do with the issue nor does it invalidate or negate that it is STILL POSTED let alone that no where did I ever say it was CANCELLED. LOL

Perhaps you're so OLD, that your not as bright as you used to be... or maybe its just that you need to take some geritol.

...


THE "GIVEN WINDOWS" WERE TAKEN FROM THE ORIGINAL "PREDICTION"/WARNING which was the WARNING FOR NOVEMBER 2012.

...


YOU ARE.

Either that or you're just playing semantics because you're unable to prove what I've explained is wrong or illogical. Why? Because you can't argue the facts and evidence for my argument.

...


The only manipulation going on is your denial of the facts because you didn't realize the warning was taken from the ORIGINAL WARNING posted 2 months ago.

If it didn't exist or was deleted, erased, cancelled and altered, then your argument might be valid.

SORRY you can't handle or comprehend that there's a TIME-STAMPED and archived quake warning for NOVEMBER (which INCLUDED THE DATES YOU CLAIM IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT-IOW ADDING DATES TO A WARNING DIFFERENT!) posted back in August and September.
Those with a brain who've done research and have kept up with things, have seen it.

get over it. The more you deny or argue that fact, the more foolish you look.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22459462


ohh ok it was archived lol, fair enough..

still, even if that prediction did exist, you are contradicting yourself, because recently you said a quake would not hit in a date you said it would hit.. thats just what im trying to say
 Quoting: MatrixLNIN11


Okay, I'm going to retract my argument and concede yours...

The quake that I said would not hit OUTSIDE the November Quake Warning I posted, hit 20 HOURS outside the quake warning window i posted. ;/ lol

happy?

;)
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22459462


hehehehehe rockon
 
Please verify you're human:




Reason for copyright violation:



News








Proud Member Of The Angry Mob