A Tale of Two Synchronicities (cont.)
By Mark Grant

We proceed by considering two macro syncs that occurred in relation to the World Trade Center attacks of September 11, 2001 – a tragedy that instantly became known as “9-1-1”. Each one represents what I consider to be ‘relational’ design: a sync that seems to reference another event.

The most recent of these two events took place at the Belmont race track in the state of New York. On the ten-year anniversary of “9-1-1”, the first three races at were won by horses numbered 9, 1 and 1, in that order.

This made the news in a variety of media, including the online version of England’s Daily Mail. At the bottom of the page where the story was featured, a poster who called himself Common Sense Connor wrote the following comment. And it was an opinion that prevailed - by a 5-0 majority:

This interpretation is both reasonable and conventional.

However, when one considers the nature of macronicity, or macro syncs, Connor’s point is actually irrelevant. Here’s why.

The premise I work from (which is only one way to view synchronicity) is that syncs are designed events that are ‘meant to be’ seen.

According to this interpretation, macro syncs are intended to be noticed by groups. This means that the designed event must somehow be prominent, easily discernible by the group.

This rule greatly constrains what can qualify as a valid macro sync, because it no longer means that any “9-1-1” correlation can suffice.

To see how this works another way, consider a poker game setting.

Let’s start with a situation where a person gets dealt a royal flush, against a chance likelihood of around 649,000 to 1.

Those who are familiar with poker would be very impressed to see this. But those who are completely unfamiliar with poker would not.

Now, suppose that one such newbie was told this was amazing, because there are only four ways out of 2.6 million that one can get a royal flush. Suppose he counters by asking how often one could expect to see the cards he was holding: a two of spades, jack of hearts, three of diamonds, six of clubs and nine of diamonds.

The answer is only one way. It follows that, technically speaking, royal flushes are four times easier to get than the hand he was dealt.

But our newbie’s hand is worthless in poker because the rules of the game constrain what is acceptably improbable.

The same logic applies to macro syncs: only prominent correlations matter.

Accordingly, the Daily Mail wouldn’t have bothered writing such an article, had the “9-1-1” race results occurred on any other day other than September 11, which is a prominent date by definition.

Likewise, there would have been no article had the race results occurred in Ecuador or Belize on a September 11. The Belmont race track results were newsworthy because that track was a staging area for rescue operations in the aftermath of the World Trade Center attacks. The prominence requirement was once again met.

Going the other way, seeing a license plate in the parking lot wouldn’t count either, because that doesn’t matter to the group – to whom macro syncs are targetted. This would be one of many examples that won’t make the grade because, for intuitively sound reasons, we can’t use ‘any’ correlation.

The same logic applies to another newsworthy story that occurred on the one-year anniversary of the attacks. On that day, the New York State three-ball lottery took place, as it always does, two times a day. In the evening draw the numbers 9,1 and 1 came up, in that exact order.

Since there are two draws, we would expect to see that result on a 9/11, once every five hundred September 11s. Returning to the poker analogy, we’re talking full house odds: 1 every 508 hands.

Now, at first glance that might not impress. Likewise with the race track results. Computer screens can dull our minds in certain respects.

So, let’s look at these two macro syncs in two other ways.

First, in terms of real rarity.

Since the results are only meaningful on a September 11 (if the New York state lottery extended far enough backward and forward in time) we should have last expected to see such a 9-1-1 lottery result on a September 11^th sometime around the year 1511, not long after Columbus’s fabled voyage. We would expect the next 9-1-1 result to occur around 2511.

We are talking about a September 11 result that ought to happen around twice every millennium. Yet it just happened to occur on the first anniversary after 9/11.

Likewise with the horse races.

Assuming there were ten horses in each of those first three races at Belmont, we would next expect to see a 9, 1 and 1 result in a thousand years or so, around the year 3011. Or two such earlier results since the time of Christ. Yet this result just happened to occur on the first ten-year anniversary of 9/11.

That’s the second point to consider.

It is a fact that people note certain anniversaries more than others, and 1ers and 10ers are among the most noted. This makes them relatively prominent in the human imagination, compared to other anniversaries. Had both results occurred on, say the 7^th or 4^th anniversaries, it certainly would have been noteworthy. But a 1er and a 10er are more impressive, generally speaking.

As I close this section I wish to emphasize that I am not insisting that a ‘designer’ must be behind either or both of these events. If one is however, then according to designer theory, both represent discreet forms of communication. Certain other things become self-evident if these are acts of intervention. For one, the ‘designer’ demonstrates an awareness of our culture and psychology. Likewise, it must have the ability to fix horse races, and infiltrate one of the most safely-guarded institutions known to man: the gaming industry.

Likewise I make no assertions regarding who the designer might be. It could be one agent or more. That being said, it does seem that, in the better instances, we may considering the handiwork of an entity(s) whose ability to choreograph human events is God-like, or at the very least, extremely advanced.

Click to watch video

A second positive interpretation is that these results could be due to some sort of mind-matter physics. According to that line of thinking, the 9-1-1 results were a consequence of collective memory, manifesting because, in fact, we humans tend to note one and ten year anniversaries more than others.

In the case of the conclusion of the Vancouver Olympic Games, what has been generated according to this theory is a glimpse into the window of the Canadian soul, and its peculiar affinity for ice hockey.

What will stand out about this moment to Canadians, and ‘hockey people’, is how the numbers of the players who teamed up to score the “Golden Goal’ add up to 99. This number is instantly recognizable, as it is the number of the greatest (most prominent) hockey player in history, Wayne Gretzky. But as it turns out, ‘99’ also contains other significant associations.

If you click on the image you can see a 2.5 minute video that shows how this spectacular macro sync may have been predicted in advance, through symbolic association at the start of the same Games.

Thirdly, I wish to emphasize that is possible that others may be able to generate similar results in relation to most goals or most selected moments. This remains to be seen. But the onus is on the skeptics to prove that point. Such findings would support the “common sense” (conventional) generalization: that one can find impressive (prominently placed) patterns in most or all events, “if one looks long enough”.