I am grateful for a review of my book, The Synchronicity Code, that starts with “This is a truly amazing discovery if it is for real.” I want to share with you just where I sit with this. While I am passionate about the subject, I am not dogmatic about it. One of the most interesting things about the Synchronicity Code is that it lies on the razor’s edge between being a transformative world view and an interesting example of how numbers can lie. I myself do not know where it will shake out in the end. Like it or not, this is your problem. I can say that, between the two of us (you and I), I am in a better position to judge, because I have been steeped in it for longer than you have.
Leaving aside human error, which I can’t rule out, all of the timelines presented in book are accurate. In other words, whatever else is happening, most of the primary events of the last century or two neatly fall along timelines that are mathematically correlated, often to a degree of precision that (at least for me) triggers an erie feeling that something out of the ordinary is going on. If the numbers (dates and times) lie, the lie is in the fact that they only seem to correlate in a special way, but really do not. So now we have to ask the question. If the timespan between the 1993 and 2001 World Trade Center bombings constitutes a time interval that rolls back almost exactly to the day of the attack on Pearl Harbor, which it does, is this something that “seems” to correlate but (for some reason) really doesn’t? Is it a case of frantic searching by someone to latch on to a match that is really just happenstance? Well, the “frantic” part doesn’t apply, I can assure you. But as to its ultimate truth, I don’t know and neither do you.
The problem with the 9/11 timeline that the skeptic must face is that it doesn’t start and end on 9/11. The length of the cycle (this is all spelled out in the book by the way; press the “add to cart” button on Amazon.com, which they call a cart but really it isn’t, with my thanks) between the 1993 bombing and the 2001 attack, when added to December 7, 1941 lands you only a few days from the “surprise attack” (that is what this cycle is all about) of the North Korean invasion of South Korea on June 25, 1950. Then, when it is added to 9/11, it hits within one day of another event that corroborates the theory. But again, neither you nor I know for sure if this is just an amazing coincidence (since life is full of them) or something more than that.
The kicker then is that there was one more roll of the dice…while we were watching. One cycle up from 9/11 lands on March 27, 2010. We now know that one day earlier, North Korea torpedoed and sank a South Korean ship, sinking it and killing 56 crew members. Go slow here. 9/11 links with Pearl Harbor, by means of the interval formed between it and the 1993 attack. This interval rolls back precisely to the day of Pearl Harbor. This same interval rolls up 1x to the start of the Korean War, and it rolls up 1x from 9/11 to a surprise North Korean aggression against South Korea that nearly re-ignites that war.
I set up the Code Calculator so you could check all this out for yourself. You are allowed to be lazy only if you accept what I say hook line and sinker. Run the numbers. They will help your mind to get it.
That’s what happened. There is a precise mathematical correlation, linking at least 5 events (Pearl Harbor, Korean War, 1993 bombing, 9/11 and North Korean torpedo) across nearly 70 years. (I say “at least” because I’ve left out some others described in the book.) Could it have been pure chance? I personally don’t think so, but it is possible. To me, the compelling point is that the 2010 attack came about after the cycle was discovered. I was looking for it, not randomly searching for something that might fit. One could say it was “predicted”. This particular occurrence is one of the pivotal reasons why I didn’t drop this whole matter as too much trouble for a busy person to pursue. When it happened, it struck me as too important to leave in the dustbin of history, without ever seeing the light of day.
The book is filled with examples like the one described above. How did I find them? I followed the coincidences and ran the calculations. During the period in which I wrote the book, I was a full-time practicing attorney and an active father of three. I wrote the book and did the research myself in my “free time”. Maybe its just me, but I don’t think I could have found all the cases that line the book if the timelines were just pulling rabbits out of a hat.
There is a “philosophical” point to this. (By “philosophical” I mean “meaning of life” point). People seem to be always looking to say “either, or”. Either its random or its not. Either its got a cause or its “acausal” (whatever that means). Maybe that isn’t the way things really are. Maybe the duality of the universe is in everything, including the “either/or”. So maybe the patterns of the Sychronicity Code could be fairly described as accidental, random occurrences. (It’s a big world out there, so there is plenty of time for stunning coincidences to form.) But at the same time, how do we feel about meaningful coincidences? How do we react to the fact that they they sometimes seem to propagate into the future, into the realm of prediction? Do we just dismiss our feelings in favor of the purely rational side of things? Or could it be that reason alone is not enough, just as feeling alone is not enough? +JAG