The attack at Pearl Harbor was 70 years ago today. But just about 10 years ago, we were reeling in the wake of the attack on the World Trade Center. Newscasters quickly picked up on the correspondence: “not since Pearl Harbor has America endured such a devastating surprise attack”.
This connection, across 60 years, was more than just chance. It was mathematically correlated with a level of precision rarely seen in the annals of world events. To discover this for yourself you would have to take the interval between the 9/11 attack and the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, adjust it slightly for the time of day, and roll it back in time, end over end, decade after decade, until you come upon, precisely, December 7, 1941.
It is possible that you could do this calculation and, after a moment’s pause, shrug your shoulders as if to say, and we’re supposed to care? The other end of the spectrum would have you feel a shudder through your body as you come to realize that this mathematical correlation to meaningfully related historical events, across vast swaths of time, implies that life itself is not what it seems. So one would be tempted to come, as quickly as possible, to some rational explanation, and settle for the idea that this is just a remarkable coincidence. The problem, in this case, is that the Pearl Harbor-9/11 sequence was predictive. The next cycle up hit the ONLY surprise attack worthy of the title during 2010, in North Korea’s sinking of a South Korean war vessel. We know that that occurrence belonged in the sequence because, one cycle up from Pearl Harbor was, within a mere few days, the commencement of the Korean War, via the surprise attack by North Korea on its southern brethren.
Still, you try to cling to the “mere coincidence” theory, but this is not fitting so well at the moment. Ever resourceful, you quickly come up with “well, statistics can lie”, and back it up with the thought that people claim all kinds of things, and there almost always is an explanation for it, if you knew all the facts. Why should this be any different? Ah, that’s better. No need to stretch. It allows one to remain comfortably in an old way of thinking.
For some, the Synchronicity Code is alluring because it holds out the promise of a new way of predicting future events. But the significance of prediction is really that it disproves the “mere coincidence” theory. This leaves us, one way or another with a new view of the connectedness of all of life. That’s what the sages have been saying for millenia.
Have a good night. +JAG