Pick a Card, Any Card – How Hancock Finds Precessional Numbers

We must all be familiar with those words used by magicians and conjurors throughout the world and the uninitiated continue to wonder how they always pick the card they are supposed to..

Similarly, many wonder how Hancock finds precessional numbers somehow apparently deliberately encoded into ancient sites and monuments throughout the world ?

Were these numbers deliberately encoded as we are led to believe or are we the victims of a conjuring trick ?

Look at Heaven’s Mirror. In Chapter 3 “Sanctuaries of the Cosmos” after a discussion of Santillana and von Dechend’s Hamlet’s Mill is the following:

In common with other esoteric numerological systems, the code is one in which it is possible to shift decimal points to the left and right and to make use of almost any conceivable combinations, permutations, multiplications, divisions and fractions of certain essential numbers (all of which relate, very precisely, to the rate of the precession of the equinoxes).

The ‘ruling’ number in the code is 72. To this was frequently added 36, making 108, and it was permissible to divide 108 by 2 to get 54 – which could then be multiplied by 10 and expressed as 540 (or as 54,000, or as 540,000, or as 5,400,000, etc). Also highly significant is 2160 (i.e. the number of years required for the vernal point to transit one complete zodiacal constellation). This could be divided by 10 to give 216, or multiplied by 10, and factors of 10 to give 216,000 or 2,160,000, etc. The number 2160 was also sometimes multiplied by 2 to give 4320 – or 43,200, or 432,000, or 4,320,000, and so on.

What has been done here is to establish goal posts for the tests that are coming. However, it is clear from this that virtually any number can be claimed as precessional !

The number 54 is found in various places. What significance does it have ? Er, it’s three-quarters of a degree of precession ! Any significance it might have is entirely because Hancock says so !

54 is also the number of playing cards in a standard pack (13 cards in each of four suits plus 2 jokers). Is this also representative of precession ?

It’s clear that the posts have been set so far apart that it’s virtually impossible not to score goal, after goal, after goal…..

…..the precessional number 216 is found, very subtly concealed, in the heart of the Great Pyramid, in a triangle that is formed by three of the basic dimensions of the so-called ‘King’s Chamber’. This room is a 2:1 rectangle exactly 20 Egyptian royal cubits in length and 10 royal cubits in width (10.46 metres x 5.23 metres). The chamber also ‘contains’ a right-angled triangle with its short dimension (15 cubits) drawn diagonally across the west wall from the lower south-west corner to the upper north-west corner, its median dimension (20 cubits) drawn along the entire length of the floor on the south side of the chamber, and its long dimension (25 cubits) drawn from the upper north-west corner of the chamber to the lower south-east corner.

These side-lengths of 15 cubits, 20 cubits and 25 cubits can be expressed as the ratio 3:4:5 (because if we allocate the value ‘3’ to the length of 15 cubits then 20 cubits must naturally have the value ‘4’ and 25 cubits must have the value ‘5’)

The real ‘secret magic’ of the triangle, however, as the Icelandic mathematician Einar Palsson has pointed out, is only revealed when the numbers are cubed.

Then we get:

3 x 3 x 3 = 27
4 x 4 x 4 = 64
5 x 5 x 5 = 125

The text then continues:

The total of 27 plus 64 plus 125 is the precessional number 216 and we do not think that it found its way into the dimensions of the King’s Chamber by accident.

Let’s summarise what Hancock has done here.

He’s started by moving the goal posts so far apart that they might as well not be there !

Next he’s taken three corners of the King’s chamber and drawn a triangle between them.

He’s then performed three – totally unjustified – mathematical operations; division by 3, cubing and addition to get a number which he has defined as significant and he then tells us that he doesn’t think it’s accidental !

Is this a deliberately encoded precessional number or a conjuror’s sleight of hand ?

John Wall

Independent Scholar

See author's posts