From: Vienna, Austria
If you have not read my posts from many locations, much of this will not make sense, don't worry about that, it does make sense to those that have been reading my posts over the last years.
Note this is a reply on the concept you are discussing, although the fact that it is posted in a different context, yet is about the same event, shows coordination, with plausible deniability of correlation.
You get a good thinking award for making the distinction of cause and effect of mutual actions in space and time.
Two people coming to the same conclusion do not define the same source or cooperation, it only defines a form of meeting in some ethereal space where the same idea occurred in thoughts of multiple people simultaneously.
From that we can ponder the question, are people connected when in correlation, is it coordination, or is it swarm, where each acts independently, but by the some same pathing end up at the same location at the same time with a similar action or intent.
Therefore we proceed to a comment by John Locke, two people with the same idea at the same moment are essentially the same person. However, they were not the same person when moving to that action in space time, nor when moving away if on different paths. So do events create situations, or do the multitude of possibilities create the illusion of coordination inside of correlation. (also why these events model 'nuclear' effects since they are far more then what would be found as a average mass at one point in space and time (Crossing the streams from Ghost Busters))
It should also be noted, coordination above correlation is about the 'Tess' Model. Or the person that understands it, is in a coordinating role, or closer to the source that instigates action. However all the pieces are usually only seen by the 'Tess' and from that it looks random or like correlation, for those that do not have both the personal experience of an event, and the correlating other pieces that form the mosaic that tells the story and shows actual coordination.
If someone can find the correlations above some rate of randomness, then coordination does exist, basic chaos theory, order in the noise. If bees swarm, that is coordination by the fact that a swarm is at some location at some time. Note removing limitations of linear time makes it much easier, where something like stop action filming could photograph 1000 bees at some correlating location and action, and then show them all in the same picture, by sequencing the events outside of linear time, and by that create an event outside of linear time that shows a level of coordination when it could be correlation.
Although outside of linear time is a presumption that item creation is the intended act of correlation, it is also possible that the intent of the object creation is to be seen in a swarm in some replay outside of its linear time when it was created. The idea of preparatory work where components to form a coordinated action are all moving from different distances in time to arrive in the same sequence of some posting.
Side note, nobody has to believe in coordination if they don't want to, however, I am due beer and travel money and the fact that I can find the information is enough to show that it is coordinated.
I could also add the correlation that your argument is something my uncle would say,
Lo Ba Ron, Or I could again repeat the Bar requirements I have been specifying, Lo Bar On, in each another correlation appears, is it coordinate? at what point does the statistics over weight the skepticism. Note the intent is not to show the form, but to show the form exists. And of coarse, from that the realization that money must be sent to me will be clear to anyone reading all the posts. However not knowing about 'the bar' or 'my uncle' would not make the correlation visible to anyone else.
You would have to have the cumulative data of all my posts and experiences to see the significance of the correlations responding to this location in time. What I call checking in, and what is also usually called advisors giving different opinions from within the fog.
Funny thing, I always think I am making them simpler not more complicated.
To discuss the concept of self-delusion now would venture a bit too far off topic.
Although thanks for the response,
mostly I was pondering on the correlations in your posts to other topics, while you were discussing correlation and coordination.
Can't get more coordinated then that.
You are welcome. If you plan to skip some of the more cryptic statements and philosophical debaucheries for above sense of humor and content, this might even have the potential for some interesting discussions.