[monks]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

Prediction 8 & Prediction 6



hS

Let's just take the first prediction in isolation.

Tolkien Prediction #71

That Tolkien would refer to Shelob as 'loathly' or loathsome'.

Hardly had Sam hidden the light of the star-glass when she came. A little way ahead and to his left he saw suddenly, issuing from a black hole of shadow under the cliff, the most loathly shape that he had ever beheld, horrible beyond the horror of an evil dream. Most like a spider she was, but huger than the great hunting beasts, and more terrible than they because of the evil purpose in her remorseless eyes.


Why would you or anyone generalize your argument about something that is so specific? Why would you refute that statement of that prediction with a general argument about the nature of predictions? What is the chance of that word being used to describe Shelob? Tell me. And the fact that I included 'loathsome' as the other word is irrelevant because it was made because of the LOATHLY lady theme- the very word which Tolkien used, and he uses it nowhere else in those '600,000' words of the LoTR. You are avoiding the subject. This has nothing to do with the nature of predictions generally -me 'seeing things I want to see' as you are characterizing it. It's about the fact that I made that specific prediction about that specific word occurring in that work to describe that specific character in it.

And I also told you that I'd never heard that word before I encountered the Loathly Lady motif in my research.

So let's deal with the matter in hand instead of avoiding it.

You are avoiding the facts in front of you. And you are avoiding the facts because you don't understand HOW I was able to make that prediction. And I have explained that it was through the forensic study of the etymologies of an enormous number of words in Tolkien's texts and letters over 15 years through which I arrived at my understanding of (among others things) how he incorporates male and female conflict (as I term it left and right handedness in 'the geometry')- the battle of the sexes- which is the subject of the Loathly Lady theme. And just by coincidence that study, that approach, is also something that you have never done.

Do you see the correlation there between not understanding and not thinking it possible and not doing the work and using the method yourself? And it's not like my method is using a crystal ball is it? It's etymology- the very stuff Tolkien lived and breathed and indeed what he told us his works were all about.

That by doing work you have never done, by using an approach that that you (and indeed anyone else) have never used I was able to do something that you can't do, and indeed don't understand. And what's more the efficacy of that method is supported by the Hammond and Scull example. And I make that point. It reveals that my method can give insights into his works that experts don't have, moreover insights into things I have never even seen. And that study of his etymologies revealed an understanding of the relationship of conflict, and indeed specific details of that conflict (the oppression of the female by the male for eg) between male and female which, having encountered the Loathly Lady motif, initiated that prediction.

So let's forget about all of the other predictions and focus on #71 in isolation shall we?

The chances of me being able to make that prediction are EXTREMELY remote. You might expect loathsome- possibly. The odds are not that great for that. But for Loathly it is. It's a very rare archaic word. Moreover I only encountered the word Loathly from the medieval motif, which supports the idea that he used it for Shelob because ...she is the Loathly Lady, or a manifestation of her. And then in addition you have the descriptions about Shelob representing the vagina dentata by others- as I found after I'd made the prediction. The vagina dentata is part of the Loathly Lady motif. So...there you have even more remote probability because clearly other people have identified Shelob with that theme.

And what's more that prediction did not even raise an eyebrow of curiosity from you, never mind acceptance of anything else I've said.

THAT behaviour alone Huinersoron is abnormal because it completely ignores the statistical improbability of that happening. It is YOUR behaviour, not mine, which is abberant or irrational.

And as if that wasn't enough. We can further multiply that irrationality again.

That prediction is regarding the Loathly Lady. And I've also stated that the Balrog is another incarnation of the Loathly Lady motif. And by another remote chance I later discovered that the Loathly Lady is MORE THAN ONCE described in the literature as carrying a multi-thonged whip. Just like the Balrog. I posted the update. And we are actually in that thread. And you knew about the essay before this update. So YOU know about both of those facts.

Now...consider that fact that I arrived at both of those characters being a manifestation of the same thing, via the same method, we can use probability and multiply that chance that I am wrong about my understanding. And we arrive at an even higher statistical improbability. And both of those things, Shelob and the Balrog derive form the same root understanding of the Loathly Lady theme.

So by multiplying that improbability we multiply your irrationality.

And yet there you are behaving in the manner that you are.

The only other thing you can bring to the table is, it was all just a massively improbable chance (and ignore the next 100 predictions waiting to be addressed) or that I'm lying about making that prediction. And to be frank with you, I think the reason why you pointed out that the image I first gave you for the first hidden image (the two female eyes) in the list above, was heavily cropped, was because I was trying to hide something from you- to limit the scope of the possibilities in some way right? And I've just given you the full image and it's actually added more supporting evidence to my initial argument. In addition you made the remark about 'indisputable power' even after me distancing myself from that kind of stuff in this thread. So both of those together suggest to me that you think I'm lying or am suffering from some kind of psychological delusion, ignoring what I'm saying, or any combination thereof. But that's not really the important issue at all here- unless you make it the important issue right?

And yet you still haven't responded to that update on that image of the eyes but posted your bizarre reply.

Again avoidance.

You behaviour IS irrational and it's rooted in the fact that you can't understand the system I'm describing. And if you can't understand the system you have applied your ignorance of that, to every single prediction and contributing piece of evidence. And let's be kind here, the reason why you can't understand the system is because you think my posts are too long and you simply don't have the time to read them or understand them. Well if you don't TAKE the time to read my posts, you'll not be able to understand the system. Obviously. But you still feel justified in your behaviour. So we go round and round in a circle- or rather you do. I'm actually continuing giving you further supporting evidence to avoid that situation and for anyone who might read this thread here or via google.

We can approach each prediction one at a time if you'd like-...shall we try beginning with #71? I already tried that anyway with Predictions #1 and 2..but we can try again.

Those two items: the loathly prediction and the whip update, would at the absolute minimum raise an eyebrow from any rational person. But they didn't. (Indeed the update was described by one lunatic as clickbait.) That is NOT a normal, rational response Huinersoron.

So, in an effort to be constructive, let's try take a few steps back. Let's ignore the system, the other predictions and the images, and any other presumptions we might have made about each other or any misunderstandings..and just concentrate on the statistical improbability of those two facts above regarding the loathly prediction and the multi-thonged whip. And we'll throw in the vagina dentata details too for good measure.

Care to try?

Any time dude.

monks