(Q - Nabil: so I would like to follow up on that and I have 1000000 questions, really, and I was wondering if I had 2 - 3 questions, I don't know if you
could answer and have you already seen the decryption of the numbers, 7172… have you seen it happen recently?)
MB: No, no, no, no, I haven't seen anything happen recently, then Nabil, you are taking me where I don't want to be taken. I didn't talk about decryption.
(Q - Nabil: No but I'm not on the expression…)
MB: But Nabil
(Q - Nabil: no, no, it’s just if there’s something new, …)
MB: Nabil, I didn’t talk to you about deciphering the numbers
(Q - Nabil: yes I didn't tell you that it can be deciphered for...)
MB: I didn't tell you whether it was necessary to decrypt them or not to decrypt them. I told you, they have a function, I did not tell you which one, so I cannot answer the fact of decrypting or not decrypting that would already be an element of answer that I do not want to give. I gave a lot of them, you have to use these figures, everyone will use them as they want…
(Q - Nabil: and no one understood these numbers Michel, no one understood what they mean?)
MB: I didn't say that there was something to understand, I didn't say that they meant something.
(Q - Nabil: so Ok, I have another question. Michel, I have another..)
MB: Nabil, let me finish.
(Q - Nabil: okay okay…)
MB: Nabil, you stick together, you stick words together, no, no, but it's really important. I tell you, we are dealing with a literary person, a literary person is someone who weighs his words, who uses them for a very specific objective. And you throw me in a few seconds, we decipher, we do this, we do that, we do whatever. You throw at me a certain number of terms which I tell you, I have never referred to.
I never told you whether to decipher, not decipher, interpret, understand, not understand, I never told you that. I told you that these figures have a use, you must understand that these figures have a use. Okay, I can't say anything more, it's important, you shouldn't…
(Q - Nabil: are they used or are they?)
MB: Yeah, but Nabil, in your questions you juggle from one word to another, you throw words at me at an accelerated rate and you, and if I haven't responded in the fraction of a second that follows, you say okay, OK, OK, but let's move on, no! A word has a meaning, Nabil, a word has a meaning, that's the whole problem we are faced with today. You can't ask me questions at this rate, give me suggestions at this rate and not expect me to respond, one word means something. Be careful of that, you use words with disconcerting ease.
(Q - Nabil: Yeah, I'm not going to go back to what...I think you've already made the remark, nlc, but in fact it's because once in a vocal , there is a person who gave you the definition of decode and decrypt and you said that it was more like decryption. That's why I used the word decryption.).
MB: So it's more like decryption, because the question was asked to me in that sense, but I'm not saying that it's pure decryption. I can assure you that these figures have a decisive use, that is quite obvious.
But the method of using these figures, I think that today, no one has succeeded in defining it, so the words that you use are not precise and that is why I cannot leave you state them at this cadence, move on, implying that perhaps there is something true in what you said.
(Q - Nabil: in fact, it's complicated Michel, if you want because I have... maybe I use them wrong in fact, I have the impression of having made a little discovery with these figures and a decryption And so I don't know, if today you say that roughly no one has captured what, I want to throw in the trash what I found. so I don't really know what to think about it anymore, so if it's not decryption or not... well, in short, this whole thing about numbers is a bit vague.)
MB: there is a constant eh Nabil, there is a constant, in 30 years no one has found it. Among the cool ones today, I can talk about them because I practiced them, I exchanged, I discussed, I read what is written, frankly there is in front of me I have tons of material gray what. I have tons of gray matter in front of me, sometimes I really am but I'm not talking bullshit, I'm not flattering anyone, there are times I'm impressed, I say to myself damn guys , wow, wow, frankly, I have tons of gray matter in front of me.
No one has found it in 30 years. So what do you deduce from this? Does that give you an idea or not?
(Q - Nabil: I have the impression that these figures, I say it honestly, I have the impression that these figures, they point us to the location, of the benchmarks …)
MB: You don't listen to me Nabil, you are incurable, indestructible, I asked you a question, I tell you, I have tons of gray matter in front of me, in 30 years, no one has found, what does it mean ?
(Q - Nabil: Ah well that means it’s not mathematical, that means that…)
MB: I never talked about mathematics, I didn’t talk about mathematics Nabil! You are unbearable, unbearable, you don't listen to me. I don't want gray matter, Nabil, that means that the solution does not rely on gray matter!
(Q - Nabil: on imagination, okay, yes, yes…)
MB: It's not just imagination, gray matter, it doesn't rely on that, it relies on cleverness and indeed, you just said it, incidentally on a form of imagination, but not on a form of intelligence. Listen to what I tell you.
Try to look, but face the situation. There are some super intelligent people on this discord.
(Q - Nabil: okay, so what I just understood is the numbers, you have to be imaginative with the numbers.)< br />
MB: Nabil, which you are probably one of, but intelligence is not the key, the key to the Golden Owl is not intelligence. The key to the Golden Owl is cunning, it's this somewhat magical combination of intelligence and imagination. A moron can't be very clever I guess.
But someone intelligent, who also has the imagination, by combining the two can find, but it is not only intelligence and gray matter in itself, and especially if we put it forward. When I hear or when I read people who resonate in a rigorous, powerful, substantiated, logical, unstoppable way, well they fail because they don't have that little side which will allow us to find things.
And it's all there and it's not at all trivial what I'm telling you. We have to get away from the rigorous reasoning of people who say yeah, that's how it is, it's not like that, Max said that, Michel said that no, no, at some point, we have to get out of that .
MB: No, no, no, no, I haven't seen anything happen recently, then Nabil, you are taking me where I don't want to be taken. I didn't talk about decryption.
(Q - Nabil: No but I'm not on the expression…)
MB: But Nabil
(Q - Nabil: no, no, it’s just if there’s something new, …)
MB: Nabil, I didn’t talk to you about deciphering the numbers
(Q - Nabil: yes I didn't tell you that it can be deciphered for...)
MB: I didn't tell you whether it was necessary to decrypt them or not to decrypt them. I told you, they have a function, I did not tell you which one, so I cannot answer the fact of decrypting or not decrypting that would already be an element of answer that I do not want to give. I gave a lot of them, you have to use these figures, everyone will use them as they want…
(Q - Nabil: and no one understood these numbers Michel, no one understood what they mean?)
MB: I didn't say that there was something to understand, I didn't say that they meant something.
(Q - Nabil: so Ok, I have another question. Michel, I have another..)
MB: Nabil, let me finish.
(Q - Nabil: okay okay…)
MB: Nabil, you stick together, you stick words together, no, no, but it's really important. I tell you, we are dealing with a literary person, a literary person is someone who weighs his words, who uses them for a very specific objective. And you throw me in a few seconds, we decipher, we do this, we do that, we do whatever. You throw at me a certain number of terms which I tell you, I have never referred to.
I never told you whether to decipher, not decipher, interpret, understand, not understand, I never told you that. I told you that these figures have a use, you must understand that these figures have a use. Okay, I can't say anything more, it's important, you shouldn't…
(Q - Nabil: are they used or are they?)
MB: Yeah, but Nabil, in your questions you juggle from one word to another, you throw words at me at an accelerated rate and you, and if I haven't responded in the fraction of a second that follows, you say okay, OK, OK, but let's move on, no! A word has a meaning, Nabil, a word has a meaning, that's the whole problem we are faced with today. You can't ask me questions at this rate, give me suggestions at this rate and not expect me to respond, one word means something. Be careful of that, you use words with disconcerting ease.
(Q - Nabil: Yeah, I'm not going to go back to what...I think you've already made the remark, nlc, but in fact it's because once in a vocal , there is a person who gave you the definition of decode and decrypt and you said that it was more like decryption. That's why I used the word decryption.).
MB: So it's more like decryption, because the question was asked to me in that sense, but I'm not saying that it's pure decryption. I can assure you that these figures have a decisive use, that is quite obvious.
But the method of using these figures, I think that today, no one has succeeded in defining it, so the words that you use are not precise and that is why I cannot leave you state them at this cadence, move on, implying that perhaps there is something true in what you said.
(Q - Nabil: in fact, it's complicated Michel, if you want because I have... maybe I use them wrong in fact, I have the impression of having made a little discovery with these figures and a decryption And so I don't know, if today you say that roughly no one has captured what, I want to throw in the trash what I found. so I don't really know what to think about it anymore, so if it's not decryption or not... well, in short, this whole thing about numbers is a bit vague.)
MB: there is a constant eh Nabil, there is a constant, in 30 years no one has found it. Among the cool ones today, I can talk about them because I practiced them, I exchanged, I discussed, I read what is written, frankly there is in front of me I have tons of material gray what. I have tons of gray matter in front of me, sometimes I really am but I'm not talking bullshit, I'm not flattering anyone, there are times I'm impressed, I say to myself damn guys , wow, wow, frankly, I have tons of gray matter in front of me.
No one has found it in 30 years. So what do you deduce from this? Does that give you an idea or not?
(Q - Nabil: I have the impression that these figures, I say it honestly, I have the impression that these figures, they point us to the location, of the benchmarks …)
MB: You don't listen to me Nabil, you are incurable, indestructible, I asked you a question, I tell you, I have tons of gray matter in front of me, in 30 years, no one has found, what does it mean ?
(Q - Nabil: Ah well that means it’s not mathematical, that means that…)
MB: I never talked about mathematics, I didn’t talk about mathematics Nabil! You are unbearable, unbearable, you don't listen to me. I don't want gray matter, Nabil, that means that the solution does not rely on gray matter!
(Q - Nabil: on imagination, okay, yes, yes…)
MB: It's not just imagination, gray matter, it doesn't rely on that, it relies on cleverness and indeed, you just said it, incidentally on a form of imagination, but not on a form of intelligence. Listen to what I tell you.
Try to look, but face the situation. There are some super intelligent people on this discord.
(Q - Nabil: okay, so what I just understood is the numbers, you have to be imaginative with the numbers.)< br />
MB: Nabil, which you are probably one of, but intelligence is not the key, the key to the Golden Owl is not intelligence. The key to the Golden Owl is cunning, it's this somewhat magical combination of intelligence and imagination. A moron can't be very clever I guess.
But someone intelligent, who also has the imagination, by combining the two can find, but it is not only intelligence and gray matter in itself, and especially if we put it forward. When I hear or when I read people who resonate in a rigorous, powerful, substantiated, logical, unstoppable way, well they fail because they don't have that little side which will allow us to find things.
And it's all there and it's not at all trivial what I'm telling you. We have to get away from the rigorous reasoning of people who say yeah, that's how it is, it's not like that, Max said that, Michel said that no, no, at some point, we have to get out of that .