New Book - The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator

[Anita Meyer]

So why is your star the size it is? Does this particular construction of the star date back thousands of years or is it something you have done?

If jews have been drawing the star in exactly the way you have for thousands of years then you might have a point saying to Trippy "But that's your star" but if the star in the picture is something you made then you still haven't explained why your star is more valid than his star.

Alphanumeric, firsly, I didn’t say my star was more valid than his star… he said that!

What I merely revealed was that the star that I exhibited correlated to the Gematria numerical equivalent of Genesis 1:1 which was 2701. While Trippys star correlates to 37 and 373 which are also structural numbers of the Bible (as was shown in the web links of my previous postings).

Yes, the Star of David goes back centuries. I have a section in my book that talks about it and where it originated from. Not only is this star form evident in nature, but as you can see it is also obviously G-d’s design incorporated within his divine word (the Bible). What it shows is unity and strength which its denominator is the Triangle/Tetrahedron (indicating first origins). Mathematics are well and good but nature keeps dragging us around by the nose. ~Albert Einstein


There is also way more to it than just what I‘ve said here.



Author Anita Meyer

 

[AlphaNumeric]

No one is denying that in the Torah there's a bunch of mathematical relationships between things like length of passages, number of words etc but the question you haven't addressed is whether these relationships are unique or uncommon.

For instance, some people think the Bible code is a sign the Bible is true because there's so many things which the code can extract. But the reason why no one of rationality cares is because it happens in all books of sufficient length. It is not something special and unique to the Bible, its the result of just basic probability. Given a large amount of text you can do the shuffling about or numerology on the text to get pretty much anything you like. And that's what you're doing. You either extract out some number and say "Wow, that's amazing" or you extract a number and then make up something to give that number more importance.

If you picked another lengthy book at random, say The Silmarillion by Tolkien and did the same analysis on it and got similar results then either you stick to your guns and declare The Silmarillion divine or you accept your can't use the method to claim the Torah is divine. Have you done this on another book? I'd imagine not. You can't claim your result unique if you have only applied it to one thing.

And like I said before muslims have done it for the Qu'ran. It has plenty of mathematical coincidences too. But then all lengthy books do.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

What I merely revealed was that the star that I exhibited correlated to the Gematria numerical equivalent of Genesis 1:1 which was 2701.

So what?

The first 4 words God says is "Let there be light" and there's 4 sides to a square. So?

In The Silmarillion Tolkien describes how the Mia sing the song of creation and current science looks at everything being made of notes on strings. Did Tolkien predict string theory 70 years before it was first thought of? Or how about how he says Iluvator sparked life with The Flame Imperishable. Science says the universe started as a fireball of matter so did Tolkien predict the big bang theory?

Not only is this star form evident in nature

But every regular shape arises in nature somewhere so there's nothing special about that star. In fact other shapes appear more than that star. Circles and spheres being the most obvious. Then there's squares and cubes. Even when you only consider 6 sided shapes the hexagon comes up in nature more than the star. So if anything your claim is false.

What it shows is unity and strength which its denominator is the Triangle/Tetrahedron (indicating first origins).

This isn't even coherent.

 

[Anita Meyer]

No one is denying that in the Torah there's a bunch of mathematical relationships between things like length of passages, number of words etc but the question you haven't addressed is whether these relationships are unique or uncommon.

For instance, some people think the Bible code is a sign the Bible is true because there's so many things which the code can extract. But the reason why no one of rationality cares is because it happens in all books of sufficient length. It is not something special and unique to the Bible, its the result of just basic probability. Given a large amount of text you can do the shuffling about or numerology on the text to get pretty much anything you like. And that's what you're doing. You either extract out some number and say "Wow, that's amazing" or you extract a number and then make up something to give that number more importance.

If you picked another lengthy book at random, say The Silmarillion by Tolkien and did the same analysis on it and got similar results then either you stick to your guns and declare The Silmarillion divine or you accept your can't use the method to claim the Torah is divine. Have you done this on another book? I'd imagine not. You can't claim your result unique if you have only applied it to one thing.

And like I said before muslims have done it for the Qu'ran. It has plenty of mathematical coincidences too. But then all lengthy books do.

Alphanumeric, as far as I know the Koran or any other books has in no way measured up to that of the Hebrew Bible regarding codes.

I’m not denying that one cannot find numerous codes in other books. This may also be a consequence of the Holy Spirit since when one is no thought, or inspired by something, we are essentially in spirit transcending all limitations of our consciousness. Following this thought, one has to question the notion that there is something greater (of a higher purpose) going on here?

What determines the difference here is when codes can be found that had foretold of past/future events and remain to be consistent. Another strong aspect about the Torah Code, is not that you find these words, but WHERE YOU FIND THEM, and that they are found in the “CONTEXT” of where YOU WOULD EXPECT to find them, and what’s more, by conspiring with meaningful associated numbers. The regularity of finding these words and the “improbability” of finding them in certain places challenges the best of religious thinkers. The closer the individual letters are to one another as well as their gamatria equivalent, the smaller the odds are of it being a coincidence, (like two or more acquaintances who unexpectedly run into each other on a street corner at a certain time), as well as the chances of words being grouped so tightly together, that they have actually been found to form and illustrate GRAPHIC PICTURES that resemble something we as humans can relate to.

One cannot deny that there is an intelligence imbibed within the Bible.



Author Anita Meyer

 

[Anita Meyer]

But every regular shape arises in nature somewhere so there's nothing special about that star. In fact other shapes appear more than that star. Circles and spheres being the most obvious. Then there's squares and cubes. Even when you only consider 6 sided shapes the hexagon comes up in nature more than the star. So if anything your claim is false.

Alphanumeric, do you think that a decahedron just pops out of thin air and is miraculously a decahedron?

NO, it is not! It first has to go through the stage of being a sphere and then growing into a Triangle/Tetrahedron and then into a Cube. There is a process of growth here.

What I am merely saying is that this Star of David (two intertwined Triangles/Tetrahedrons) can be found within Genesis 1:1(indicating first origins).

Not only in the Gamatria equivalent do we find this equation, but if one wants to look at it in another way the Star of David can also be derived from the very first word of the Bible which is the Hebrew word “Barashith” which means “In the Beginning”. That word can be broken down into two words which mean “Bara” = created and “shith” = six… which literally means created six as in the 6 points in a Star of David.

If one still cannot understand the basic message here… a three part nature (Triangle) can be derived from just the very first three letters of the word “Barashith” which represent the 3- part nature of the trinity (G-d the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit). The B stand for Ben/Son, the A stands for Abah/Father, and the R stands for Ruach/Spirit.

Hebrew is what’s called a conceptual language… which means it is to be understand by all peoples. That is why the Bible also speaks in parables as well.



Author Anita Meyer.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Alphanumeric, as far as I know the Koran or any other books has in no way measured up to that of the Hebrew Bible regarding codes.

Argument from ignorance is not an argument.

I’m not denying that one cannot find numerous codes in other books. This may also be a consequence of the Holy Spirit since when one is no thought, or inspired by something, we are essentially in spirit transcending all limitations of our consciousness. Following this thought, one has to question the notion that there is something greater (of a higher purpose) going on here?

You completely failed to justify your argument.

If every book has the patterns the Torah has then you can't use the patterns in the Torah to claim its special, irrespective of whether the holy spirit is behind all the patterns or not. Your argument is "This is so special God exists". If it isn't special your argument fails (ignoring the fact its a terrible argument to begin with).

What determines the difference here is when codes can be found that had foretold of past/future events and remain to be consistent.

This is simply not true. All of the 'predictions' are always vague and open to wild interpretation. And each one has been claimed at some time or another to predict many different things. Unless you can point to an unambiguous passage in the Bible which predicts something specific you are making an unjustified claim. All these predictions are always either after the event and using hindsight or they turn out to be wrong.

and the “improbability” of finding them in certain places challenges the best of religious thinkers.

But 'the best religious thinkers' is hardly a very high bar. Like I said, unless you apply your methods to other books and demonstrate the Torah is particularly special it doesn't matter how many coincidences etc appear because you haven't demonstrated its unnatural. If every book has these coincidences then the answer, which your best religious thinkers have obviously missed, is that you're doing pointless numerology and simply picking out coincidences in noise.

A million monkeys at a million type writers for a million years might type out Hamlet but they'll also type out reams and reams of nonsense. That's the thing with probability, if you have enough samples you'll find amazingly rare things happen at some point. It's extremely unlikely you'll win the lottery but its practically certain someone will.

One cannot deny that there is an intelligence imbibed within the Bible.

Yes, you can and I've provided you with a reason why. You claim the Bible is special but you haven't looked at any other books. Hence you have not proven your claim its special. To be 'out of the ordinary' you need to compare it to 'the ordinary'. You haven't. Hence I can deny your claims and will continue to do so unless you can provide the analysis I just said and even then I would not automatically believe you.

You only think you can't deny your argument because, to be perfectly frank, you clearly have terrible logic and reasoning skills and you are very ignorant of mathematics and science. If there were some amazingly obvious special occurrence of something in science wouldn't more scientists be theistic than in the rest of the population? Instead it is the other way around. I know about a great deal more mathematical symmetries and structures seen in nature than you and I do not agree with your claims.

Alphanumeric, do you think that a decahedron just pops out of thin air and is miraculously a decahedron?

NO, it is not! It first has to go through the stage of being a sphere and then growing into a Triangle/Tetrahedron and then into a Cube. There is a process of growth here.

In mathematics a dodecahedron is not 'grown' out of some simpler shape, it is what it is. In physics things which form dodecahedrons, such as carbon allotropes, do not first form tetrahedra, then cubes then dodecahedrons. Look up Bucky balls and you'll see.

So once again you're making claims about areas you simply haven't researched and don't understand. And you're stupid enough to try and tell people who have what you guess is right. Trippy is a chemist by profession and I'm sure he'll coroborate what I said about Bucky balls, they don't 'grow' as you describe. I'm a mathematician and a physicist and I don't agree with your claims about the star turning up everywhere or what you say about how pi and phi 'collaborate'. You just make up stuff because you haven't the intellectual curiosity to find out and you are dishonest enough to lie to people who have found out.

What I am merely saying is that this Star of David (two intertwined Triangles/Tetrahedrons) can be found within Genesis 1:1(indicating first origins).

If you consider that 'evidence' then you have a very accepting mind.

I'm a Grammy award winning Olympic athlete who fights crime in my spare time. Do you believe me? Of course not, its such a big claim and I provide no evidence. You're doing the same.

If one still cannot understand the basic message here… a three part nature (Triangle) can be derived from just the very first three letters of the word “Barashith” which represent the 3- part nature of the trinity (G-d the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit). The B stand for Ben/Son, the A stands for Abah/Father, and the R stands for Ruach/Spirit.

When you try to pass off nonsense like that as 'evidence' you demonstrate how little (ie none) you've read about science and maths.

 

[Anita Meyer]

You completely failed to justify your argument.

If every book has the patterns the Torah has then you can't use the patterns in the Torah to claim its special, irrespective of whether the holy spirit is behind all the patterns or not. Your argument is "This is so special God exists". If it isn't special your argument fails (ignoring the fact its a terrible argument to begin with).

Yes, you can and I've provided you with a reason why. You claim the Bible is special but you haven't looked at any other books. Hence you have not proven your claim its special. To be 'out of the ordinary' you need to compare it to 'the ordinary'. You haven't. Hence I can deny your claims and will continue to do so unless you can provide the analysis I just said and even then I would not automatically believe you.

You only think you can't deny your argument because, to be perfectly frank, you clearly have terrible logic and reasoning skills and you are very ignorant of mathematics and science. If there were some amazingly obvious special occurrence of something in science wouldn't more scientists be theistic than in the rest of the population? Instead it is the other way around. I know about a great deal more mathematical symmetries and structures seen in nature than you and I do not agree with your claims.

Looks who’s talking… all you’ve been doing is leading the league in nostril hair!

I wrote a book that shows all this - its all in the book! I have a whole chapter on the Bible Code that shows these codes. In your case a closed mind is like a closed book - just a block of wood! Its clear to see that you are so narrow minded in this aspect that if you fell on a pin it would blind you in both eyes.

In mathematics a dodecahedron is not 'grown' out of some simpler shape, it is what it is. In physics things which form dodecahedrons, such as carbon allotropes, do not first form tetrahedra, then cubes then dodecahedrons. Look up Bucky balls and you'll see.

Buckyballs:

It still does not change the fact that this form and its shape “consists” of the basic shape of a Triangle/Tetrahedron (as I’ve said/showed in earlier posting here).

Alphanumeric, what you are guilty of doing is viewing the whole and not just its parts - thus loosing out on seeing the bigger picture. Along with this not having the ability to see the significance beyond the obvious.

Author Anita Meyer

 

[Trippy]

You certainly called it YOUR STAR!

You threw a rock at the ground and missed.

Oh and BTW nothing I said was “imperfect” as you call it. It all correlates, just as your perfect star does. Again, thank you for illuminating this!

Author Anita Meyer

I think you missed the point.

And your maths is still wrong.

Or do I need to have faith when I do the calculations in order for them to come out correctly.

 

[Trippy]

Alphanumeric, firsly, I didn’t say my star was more valid than his star… he said that!

What I merely revealed was that the star that I exhibited correlated to the Gematria numerical equivalent of Genesis 1:1 which was 2701. While Trippys star correlates to 37 and 373 which are also structural numbers of the Bible (as was shown in the web links of my previous postings).

Author Anita Meyer

And this is why I said none of the stars in the pages you linked to were my star - ther were all made up of 37 elements. My star is made up of 37 elements each of which is made up of 37 elements, my star therefore has 1369 elements, which is unlike anything on any of the pages you linked to.

 

[Trippy]

Looks who’s talking… all you’ve been doing is leading the league in nostril hair!

I wrote a book that shows all this - its all in the book! I have a whole chapter on the Bible Code that shows these codes. In your case a closed mind is like a closed book - just a block of wood! Its clear to see that you are so narrow minded in this aspect that if you fell on a pin it would blind you in both eyes.

Buckyballs:

It still does not change the fact that this form and its shape “consists” of the basic shape of a Triangle/Tetrahedron (as I’ve said/showed in earlier posting here).

Alphanumeric, what you are guilty of doing is viewing the whole and not just its parts - thus loosing out on seeing the bigger picture. Along with this not having the ability to see the significance beyond the obvious.

Author Anita Meyer

All of which is made up of spheres, which is proof of the Holy Trinity of the Flying SPaghetti Monster, Invisible Pink Unicorn, and Bacchus.

 

[James R]

It still does not change the fact that this form and its shape “consists” of the basic shape of a Triangle/Tetrahedron (as I’ve said/showed in earlier posting here).

You're still confused, thinking that triangles and tetrahedrons are the same thing. Similarly, you're still confused thinking that pi and phi are the same thing.

Buckyballs are not made out of trianges or tetrahedrons - just look at the diagram you posted above. The "faces" of a buckyball are hexagons and pentagons.

 

[Jack_]

Alphanumeric, do you think that a decahedron just pops out of thin air and is miraculously a decahedron?

NO, it is not! It first has to go through the stage of being a sphere and then growing into a Triangle/Tetrahedron and then into a Cube. There is a process of growth here.

What I am merely saying is that this Star of David (two intertwined Triangles/Tetrahedrons) can be found within Genesis 1:1(indicating first origins).

Not only in the Gamatria equivalent do we find this equation, but if one wants to look at it in another way the Star of David can also be derived from the very first word of the Bible which is the Hebrew word “Barashith” which means “In the Beginning”. That word can be broken down into two words which mean “Bara” = created and “shith” = six… which literally means created six as in the 6 points in a Star of David.

If one still cannot understand the basic message here… a three part nature (Triangle) can be derived from just the very first three letters of the word “Barashith” which represent the 3- part nature of the trinity (G-d the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit). The B stand for Ben/Son, the A stands for Abah/Father, and the R stands for Ruach/Spirit.

Hebrew is what’s called a conceptual language… which means it is to be understand by all peoples. That is why the Bible also speaks in parables as well.



Author Anita Meyer.

NO, it is not! It first has to go through the stage of being a sphere and then growing into a Triangle/Tetrahedron and then into a Cube. There is a process of growth here.

Please show me the recursive procedure for this.

Thanks.

 

[Anita Meyer]

I think you missed the point.

And your maths is still wrong.

Or do I need to have faith when I do the calculations in order for them to come out correctly.

Ok Trippy, I have broken it down here to make it easier for you:

913 = 400+10+300+1+200+2
203 = 1+200+2
86 = 40+10+5+30+1
401 = 400+1
395 = 40+10+40+300+5
407 = 400+1+6
296 = 90+200+1+5
Total 913+203+86+401+395+407+296 = 2701

Than we have 28 individual letters all together in Genesis 1:1. Lets multiply the value of each word together:

(2 x 200 x 1 x 300 x 10 x 400) = 48
(2 x 200 x 1) = 400
(1 x 30 x 5 x 10 x 40) = 6
(1 x 400) = 4
(5 x 300 x 40 x 10 x 40) = 24
(6 x 1 x 400) = 24
(5 x 1 x 200 x 90) = 9

Now multiply these numbers: 48 x 400 x 6 x 4 x 24 x 24 x 9 = which gives us 2.3887872

Now we multiply the 7 words together: 913 x 203 x 86 x 401 x 395 x 407 x 296 = which gives us 3.0415349

Now take 28 x 2.3887872 = 6.6886041
And 7 x 3.0415349 = 2.1290744

Now take 6.6886041 divided by 2.1290744 = 3.1415549

The number reads 3.14 otherwise known as Pi

I’m not interested by the numbers that come after the 3.1415549, IT STILL REGISTERS AS 3.14 WHICH IS CLEARLY PI.



Author Anita Meyer

 

[Anita Meyer]

“ Originally Posted by Anita Meyer
It still does not change the fact that this form and its shape “consists” of the basic shape of a Triangle/Tetrahedron (as I’ve said/showed in earlier posting here). ”

You're still confused, thinking that triangles and tetrahedrons are the same thing. Similarly, you're still confused thinking that pi and phi are the same thing.

Buckyballs are not made out of trianges or tetrahedrons - just look at the diagram you posted above. The "faces" of a buckyball are hexagons and pentagons.

James I thought that we already worked through this understanding in a previous posting. Why the rehashing again?

The faces of the Buckyball may indeed be hexagons and pentagons, but those very shapes are derived from the smaller derivative (spin-off) of a Triangle (face) since it takes 6 triangles to make a hexagon.

I though I made it clear. In geometry, a tetrahedron (plural: tetrahedra) is a polyhedron (a geometric solid with flat faces and straight edges) composed of four triangular faces, three of which meet at each vertex.

One side of it looks like this, and it is the basic shape that the other four sides take on. In other words it is an emulation of "one" original face which has three points:

A Triangle has 3 points equivalent to one face. A Tetrahedron has 4 points and 4 faces.

Now James I also know that Phi and Pi are not the same (and I never claimed they were the same). Phi is 1.618 and Pi is 3.14. But both these numbers closely oscillate around the Golden Mean Spiral.



Author Anita Meyer

 

[Trippy]

Ok Trippy, I have broken it down here to make it easier for you:

913 = 400+10+300+1+200+2
203 = 1+200+2
86 = 40+10+5+30+1
401 = 400+1
395 = 40+10+40+300+5
407 = 400+1+6
296 = 90+200+1+5
Total 913+203+86+401+395+407+296 = 2701

Up to here is correct, and I have already aknowledged this.

Than we have 28 individual letters all together in Genesis 1:1. Lets multiply the value of each word together:

(2 x 200 x 1 x 300 x 10 x 400) = 48

No, it doesn't, it 2 x 200 x 1 x 300 x 10 x 400=480,000,000 your answer is 7 orders or magnitude out, this can be confirmed by counting the zeroes.

(2 x 200 x 1) = 400

Correct

(1 x 30 x 5 x 10 x 40) = 6

Wrong, (1 x 30 x 5 x 10 x 40)=60,000 - your answer is 5 orders of magnitude out, even (1 x 3 x 5 x 1 x 4) is still 60.

(1 x 400) = 4

No, 400, not 4.

(5 x 300 x 40 x 10 x 40) = 24

Wrong, 24,000,000 your answer is 6 orders of magnitude wrong.

(6 x 1 x 400) = 24

No, it comes to 2,400

(5 x 1 x 200 x 90) = 9

No, it comes to 90,000

Now multiply these numbers: 48 x 400 x 6 x 4 x 24 x 24 x 9 = which gives us 2.3887872

No it doesn't, it comes to 2,388,787,200 your anser is 7 orders of magnitude out, and your calculation is itself based on numbers that are up to 7 orders of magnitude out, meaning that over all, your number that you've bolded is actually 36 orders of magnitude to small (or something equally ridiculous).

Now we multiply the 7 words together: 913 x 203 x 86 x 401 x 395 x 407 x 296 = which gives us 3.0415349

No it doesn't, it gives us 304,153,525,784,175,760 your answer is out by 18 orders of magnitude.

Now take 28 x 2.3887872 = 6.6886041
And 7 x 3.0415349 = 2.1290744

Um, no. 28 x 2.3887872 = 66.8860416 - your answer is one order of magnitude out, and based on a number that is at least 36 orders of magnitude out.
And no, 7 x 3.01415349=16.7215104, so your number is wrong and an order of magnitude out.

Now take 6.6886041 divided by 2.1290744 = 3.1415549

See, this bit is also actually correct, however, those aren't the numbers that are derived by your methodology
$$\frac{66.8860416}{16.7215104}$$=4
$$\frac{2.7869184e+32}{304,153,525,784,175,760}$$=916286731450737.43921495588796204, which isn't even a multiple or pi.

The number reads 3.14 otherwise known as Pi

No, it's a 3 digit approximation of Pi, not Pi.

I’m not interested by the numbers that come after the 3.1415549, IT STILL REGISTERS AS 3.14 WHICH IS CLEARLY PI.

Author Anita Meyer

Then you're neither interested in reality, or truth, because it doesn't register as Pi, it only registers as an approximation of Pi that's only accurate to 3 sf, for comparison, 22/7, which I believe was known to the greeks as an approximation of Pi, gives the same value of Pi as your calculation does to the same accuracy, it has the added bonus of being easier to remember than your wrong numbers.

 

[Anita Meyer]

NO, it is not! It first has to go through the stage of being a sphere and then growing into a Triangle/Tetrahedron and then into a Cube. There is a process of growth here.

Please show me the recursive procedure for this.

Hello Jack,

We can clearly see this recursive (self-repeating) pattern in the fertilization of a human egg. It starts off as a single sphere. It then splits in half (2) and then splits again into (4) and so on…

Six is a multiple of three. The basic building block of solid form is the tetrahedron, a pyramid with a triangular base and all sides the same length. The pollen grain below appears to have the same base form as the human embryo at four cells. The fourth cell of the human embryo is at the back, in the middle. Imagine joining the centers of the cells in three dimensions. Now you have a triangular pyramid called a tetrahedron.

The human embryo develops according to the mathematics known as the Binary Sequence, created by doubling the previous number. Cells split into two. When the tetrahedron form of four cells doubles to eight cells, the embryo takes up the mathematical geometry of the star tetrahedron, two intersecting tetrahedrons, as below. You cannot see the eighth cell, which again, is at the middle at the back.

Author Anita Meyer

 

[Anita Meyer]

Trippy, its still 3.14. It might be underestimated by a small percent (%) but nonetheless it is still Pi 3.14

If you prefer to use your 22/7 as Pi that is fine also, since there are exactly 22 Hebrew letters in the Hebrew alphabet and there are 7 words in the first paragraph of Genesis 1:1

Therefore if we take 22 divided by 7 it equals 3.14

Qabalah (which is oral Torah) explains to us that G-d used the 22 Hebrew letters in creating everything that exists. What a perfect way of illustrating Pi 3.14

Like I said, Hebrew is a conceptual language. If at first you cannot understand the message in the first word it repeats it in the next. There are many layers to Torah.



Author Anita Meyer

 

[Trippy]

Trippy, its still 3.14. It might be underestimated by a small percent (%) but nonetheless it is still Pi 3.14

If you prefer to use your 22/7 as Pi that is fine also, since there are exactly 22 Hebrew letters in the Hebrew alphabet and there are 7 words in the first paragraph of Genesis 1:1

Therefore if we take 22 divided by 7 it equals 3.14

Qabalah (which is oral Torah) explains to us that G-d used the 22 Hebrew letters in creating everything that exists. What a perfect way of illustrating Pi 3.14

Like I said, Hebrew is a conceptual language. If at first you cannot understand the message in the first word it repeats it in the next. There are many layers to Torah.



Author Anita Meyer

14 orders of magnitude is not a 'small percentage'.
Neither is the fact that you come out with completely the wrong numbers if you do it properly.

That's the point you keep failing to address, that's why you're nothing more than a psuedoscientific quack-pot.

Your method DOES NOT WORK unless you ignore stuff, and you insist on ignoring the fact that you ignore stuff which is even more disgusting.

 

[James R]

[Blah blah blah] ... = 3.1415549

Pi, to the same number of decimal places as this, is 3.1415927. The number you "calculated" is not pi. It's not even an 8-digit approximation of pi. Dropping the excess incorrect digits, you've come up with 3.1416. But any resemblance to pi is purely coincidental, since the method you used to get this is essentially just a bunch of random calculations.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Trippy, its still 3.14. It might be underestimated by a small percent (%) but nonetheless it is still Pi 3.14

If you prefer to use your 22/7 as Pi that is fine also, since there are exactly 22 Hebrew letters in the Hebrew alphabet and there are 7 words in the first paragraph of Genesis 1:1

Therefore if we take 22 divided by 7 it equals 3.14

Qabalah (which is oral Torah) explains to us that G-d used the 22 Hebrew letters in creating everything that exists. What a perfect way of illustrating Pi 3.14

If God is perfect why would he need to round things off? Could he not use some kind of method which conveys the exact value of pi? Hell, the Egyptians built the pyramids using a number of geometric principles which are seen (though modern trigonometry) to lead to values of pi which are much much better than 22/7. Can we use your logic to declare the Egyptian gods true?

Looks who’s talking… all you’ve been doing is leading the league in nostril hair!

Excellent ad hom retort. You didn't actually respond to anything I said and you just threw a baseless irrelevant insult at me. If you actually had good justification for your claims you'd be replying with reasoned informed logic not random insults.