General Joe Rogan Experience Terrence Howard #2152
- Thread starter Rambo John J
- Start date
seen a couple clips on YouTube already discussing the periodic table, I'll give it a full listen tomorrow.Will some of you nerds and@sparkuri s give this a listen and tell me what is going on.
noticed Rogan finally broke and started throwing in commercials during the podcast, that must have came with his latest deal.
Terrance Howard has been on a tour for awhile.Will some of you nerds and
He points out the ancient symbol "The Flower of Life", which is the mathematic symbol for representations of everything in the universe.
What he "figured out" is that Pythagoras & mathematicians since have bee trying to figure out its formula using linear math & that was the wrong way to go about it.
2 movies come to mind simplistically in theory.
1 is interstellar, when Mathew McConaughey scientists daughter. confronted the role of the chief scientist played by Michael Caine.
She said that he had been trying to solve the riddle with one, no 0 hands tied behind his back in other words his approach to thinking about the problem led nowhere which was his life's work but actually he knew it.
The other is the movie Contact with Jodie Foster when she's trying to figure out what the primer is for the codes that the Vegans sent them via radio audio and visual signals. There was an interlaced message digitally.
The actor John Hurt was explaining to her he found the primer, And she was thinking about the problem linear & said it doesn't make sense.
He said "it does, if you thnk like a Vegan", Turning the interlaced pages into a sphere type codex with each primer piece connecting at the points creating a codex.
This is basically what Terrence is saying.
I have a pretty cool book that I've been reading that outlines some of the theories. These theories aren't necessarily new and I haven't heard anything from Terence that actually solves it.
But that's probably because his audience doesn't really understand what he's talking about anyway.
He has a good breakdown on YT, probably better than JRE, which I haven't watched Because Joe Rogan's audience are literally average Joes. It might have been a Ted talks.
Another way of looking at it is a quantum computer chip.
Most computer chips in fact all computer chips that we use work on a linear scale of one's and zero's and programs of one's and zero's to simplify into base patterns.
Quantum chips like China perfected awhile ago work multi dimensional.
So as where people think about AI being on a pace to do this or that the fact of the matter is it would have already been done long ago according to the theory of quantum mechanics and AI and exponential growth.
This is why the world economic forum and their minions tell us that we have no free will because theoretically it's a program and this is also why movies like the matrix and such came out introducing these theories.
Most computer chips in fact all computer chips that we use work on a linear scale of one's and zero's and programs of one's and zero's to simplify into base patterns.
Quantum chips like China perfected awhile ago work multi dimensional.
So as where people think about AI being on a pace to do this or that the fact of the matter is it would have already been done long ago according to the theory of quantum mechanics and AI and exponential growth.
This is why the world economic forum and their minions tell us that we have no free will because theoretically it's a program and this is also why movies like the matrix and such came out introducing these theories.
Joe is half dumb, Howard broke his brain even though Joe understood very very little.
Rogan said Gold is good for nothing near the end of this podcast.
That is something some dumb folks say, I have met them.
Gold has a very unique blend of properties, surprised Joe still doesn't know this.
If all else fails do what the elite do right?
Stack gold.
Murder journalists.
Other stuff...
Is this the Terryology guy? That Terrence Howard?
I remember seeing a quote from him about why he believes that 1x1 does not equal 1, but rather that 1x1=2.
"How can it equal one?" he said. "If one times one equals one that means that two is of no value because one times itself has no effect. One times one equals two because the square root of four is two, so what's the square root of two? Should be one, but we're told it's two, and that cannot be."
Guy sounds nuttier thana fruitcake. If 1x1=2, what about 1x2? Does that equal 3? He's definitely on crack.
I remember seeing a quote from him about why he believes that 1x1 does not equal 1, but rather that 1x1=2.
"How can it equal one?" he said. "If one times one equals one that means that two is of no value because one times itself has no effect. One times one equals two because the square root of four is two, so what's the square root of two? Should be one, but we're told it's two, and that cannot be."
Guy sounds nuttier thana fruitcake. If 1x1=2, what about 1x2? Does that equal 3? He's definitely on crack.
No, it’s this guyIs this the Terryology guy? That Terrence Howard?
I remember seeing a quote from him about why he believes that 1x1 does not equal 1, but rather that 1x1=2.
"How can it equal one?" he said. "If one times one equals one that means that two is of no value because one times itself has no effect. One times one equals two because the square root of four is two, so what's the square root of two? Should be one, but we're told it's two, and that cannot be."
Guy sounds nuttier thana fruitcake. If 1x1=2, what about 1x2? Does that equal 3? He's definitely on crack.
Did you listen to any of the podcast?Is this the Terryology guy? That Terrence Howard?
I remember seeing a quote from him about why he believes that 1x1 does not equal 1, but rather that 1x1=2.
"How can it equal one?" he said. "If one times one equals one that means that two is of no value because one times itself has no effect. One times one equals two because the square root of four is two, so what's the square root of two? Should be one, but we're told it's two, and that cannot be."
Guy sounds nuttier thana fruitcake. If 1x1=2, what about 1x2? Does that equal 3? He's definitely on crack.
Quotes are often taken out of context, so they are often unreliable out of context.
Certainly a possibility he is on crack and off rocker, but I am fully open for discussion of the physics.
Last edited:
Simply put, he thinks that 1x1=2.
Doesn't matter how many big words you use, or how long you waffle on about it, that's just plain dumb.
Multiply something by 0.5, and it halves it.
Multiply something by 2, and it doubles it.
Multiply something by 1, it stays the same.
No way I'm listening to 3 hours of that retard trying to claim otherwise! 😁
His math shit was goofy.
He kept going on about 1x1=2
No.
If you have 1 set of 1 thing...you have 1 thing.
If you have 2 sets of 1 thing...you have 2 things.
If you have 2 sets of 2 things...you have 4 things.
When he started talking about the square root of 1 he went full derp.
The other stuff about the elements was interesting.
He's smart. But a touch whacko.
The periodic table stuff makes a lot more sense than the way it is currently laid out, that was interesting.