Quantum-Language-Parse-Syntax-Grammar arms you with knowledge /power to avoid arguing over meanings and definitions especially in any contracts or legal documentation.
“It is apparent,” says Duncan, in his Elements of Logic, “that we are sufficiently provided with the means of communicating our thoughts one to another; and that the mistakes so frequently complained of on this head, are wholly owing to ourselves, in not sufficiently defining the terms we use; or perhaps not connecting them with clear and determinate ideas.”—Logic, p. 69.
“Definitions are intended to make known the meaning of words standing for complex ideas… And were we always careful to form those ideas exactly in our minds, and copy our definitions from that appearance, much of the confusion and obscurity complained of in languages might be prevented.”-P. 70.
“The writings of the mathematicians are a clear proof, how much the advancement of human knowledge depends upon a right use of definitions.”—P. 72.
“A mistaken idea never fails to occasion a mistake also in the definition. … If a person cannot tell what a thing is, it is commonly considered to be a fair inference, that he does not know. Will any grammarian say, “I know well enough what the thing is, but I cannot tell”
International Rules Of Grammar
Without International rules of grammar, there can be no international commerce, because all commerce begins with a contract. Every thing starts with a contract, whether it’s a verbal agreement, or something in writing.
By following the rules of correct sentence structure, you have power to stop and correct Government departments or agencies, or corporations who are seeking to take money or possessions by force.
While some of the Quantum Grammar Coach’s notes on this page are taken from DWM videos, do you own research including reading DWMLC.NET and watching DWM videos.
DWM claims that without writing sentences using prepositional phrases, all Acts, Statutes, Codes, Rules and Regulations say nothing and have no factual basis. The reason for this is that every sentence contains adverbs, verbs, adjectives and pronouns, yet there are no facts or nouns.
Using past tense and future tense verbs, making verbs out of nouns, and the inherent lack of any substance of verbs… All these factors play a part in the reducing of the written word into a pile of worthless, unenforceable* rubbish… And reduce our laws into impenetrable smoke and mirrors that cannot be relied upon by “we the people”.
*Un-en-Force-able, save for the M.A.F.I.A. style intimidation …
Today’s lawyers are unwittingly taught to write in ways that give the courts maximum discretion. The uses and the interpretations of verbs play a large role in the manipulation of law. Thus, the law is what the judges declare. Through the possible manipulations of the verb, unwary litigants are the prey of the wealthy, their lawyers, and of the government with their “law en-FORCE-ment” agencies.
Quantum-Language-Parse-Syntax-Grammar corrects those manipulations… By learning this technology you can write contracts and lawsuits that leave no room for mis-understanding… by writing no wriggle-room, water-tight contracts, that cannot be argued.
For help, an outline of where to start, or any questions and concerns, Send us an email
“If You Learn How To Syntax Your Contracts You Will Learn Self Security. Protect Yourself From Being Harvested”.
– David-Wynn: Miller, 23rd June 2010
English Without The Use Of “Is/Are “
Now, before you think this article is going off track, have a little patience… It’s all coming together and making sense in the last few paragraphs.
With DWM’s Quantum-Language-Parse-Syntax-Grammar technology, “IS” singular, and “ARE” – plural are the only verbs we use for correct grammar, also known as correct-sentence-structure-communication.
Compare this idea with the concept of removing every IS/ARE from your speech…
Here’s an extract from an article by Robert Anton Wilson, “English Prime, E-Prime, Or English Without The Use Of ‘Is’ “.
“E-prime is English without the use of any form of “is” or being.
We’re trapped in linguistic constructs. All that is IS metaphor. I believe somebody said that before me. I’ve decided we can’t get beyond words. What we gotta do is get more cynical about our words.
You’ll find that by dispensing with “is”, and trying to reformulate without “is”, you just naturally fall into the kind of expression which is considered acceptable in modern science.
And also, it’s the type of consciousness that Zen Buddhism tries to induce. Using E-Prime, you will understand modern science and Zen Buddhism both, a lot better than you’ve ever understood them before. Martin Gardner has written a long essay proving that to think like this will destroy your mind. I think it adds tremendously to clarity.
[You can start by]… removing the “is” from my writing more and more. Removing it from your speech is even harder.
Instead of thinking, “The grass is green,” think that “the grass appears green to me.” And this saved me a lot of time. By the way, I don’t get embroiled in arguments like Beethoven is better than Mozart, or rock is better than soul. I define such things as meaningless.
Emotions With Words
So when people get into arguments like that I just say, “Well, Beethoven seems better to me than Mozart most of the time.” … Instead of saying, “Beethoven is better than Mozart.”
“Once you take out “IS” in your negative statements, you find out they are all relative to how you feel at the moment.
If everybody used “maybe” more often, the increase in general sanity would seem absolutely astonishing and completely flabbergast everybody.
Listen to the craziest people on the news and on television, or the craziest columnists in the newspaper. And notice they never say “maybe”, they are always quite sure.
There is no “is.”
They never say, “seems,” they always say “is.”
No one goes to war over a math problem
“I am continually astonished at all of the people in the world who think they know the answer to everything. None of them ever suspect they might be cosmic schmucks and have the wrong answer. And I find that any explanation that makes sense to me is in Korzybski’s Science and Sanity.
These people don’t know how to use language properly. They are using language in an overly-dogmatic way which sets their brain in totally dogmatic modes. So they think dogmatically, they perceive dogmatically, they even smell dogmatically, they hear dogmatically.
And they are locked in a trap of fixed neuro-semantic circuits in their brains. Whereas, knowing I’m a cosmic schmuck, I always think of at least five alternatives.
[Think about what happens] when people start arguing about words.
They mostly arguing about whether the words that they apply to objects they have created out of the infinity of possible objects that could be put together…
They’ve picked up a few of them, put words on them, then they quarrel about the words.
[As DWM, says, “No one goes to war over a math problem”.]
And if these people get to the stage where they are willing to kill one another over the words… [So] they should be put in a nice, quiet home in the country with kindly doctors, and beautiful nurses, and a good sedative.
But generally, they end up in government and start bombing one another.
Or they lead religious crusades for the true faith and kill one another with swords or some such thing.
***
Explain Quantum Physics Simply
“When I moved from Los Angeles, I moved into what I thought was Santa Cruz. Then we had something stolen from our car, and we called the police, and I found out we didn’t live in Santa Cruz, we lived in a town called Capitola.
The Post Office thought we lived in Santa Cruz, but the police thought we lived in Capitola. I started investigating this, and a reporter on the local newspaper told me we lived in neither Santa Cruz or Capitola, we lived in an unincorporated area called Live Oak.
Now, quantum mechanics is just like that, except that in the case of Santa Cruz, Capitola, and Live Oak… We don’t get too confused, because, remember, we invented the lines on the map.
Quantum physics seems confusing because a lot of people believe we didn’t invent the lines…
So it seems hard to understand how a particle can be in three places at the same time without being anywhere at all.
But … remember that we invented all of the boundaries, borders and lines, just like the Berlin Wall… Then quantum mechanics is no more mysterious than the fact that I live in three places at the same time.
No Chinese raised on “I Ching” has ever found quantum mechanics puzzling.
It’s only puzzling to people raised on Aristotelian logic where things are either A or not A.
In the “I Ching”, things are A and not A at the same time.”
Quantum Language – No Jumping To Conclusions
“With quantum mechanics, you can prove that light is made out of particles experimentally.
You can build up a whole mathematical theory of light travelling in little particles called photons… And you can do experiments.
Those experiments will give you a pattern showing that light is travelling like particles.
We’ve also got a whole mathematical theory built up showing that light travels as waves…
As well as experiments that will show you that light travels as waves.
One physicist in the 1920s said,
“It looks as if the damn light is waiting to see how we’re going to do the experiment and then deciding which way it’s going to travel.”
Schroedinger said, “I wish I never got mixed up with this radomptoquantumschringereit. This goddamned quantum jumping.”
The modified Copenhagen view is light is neither waves nor particles until we look, and then it adjusts itself depending on what we’re looking at it with.
An electron is not anywhere until we look, and when we look, the electron decides to be somewhere as long as we’re looking.
As soon as we stop looking, the electron is everywhere again.
Every model we make tells us how our mind works as much as it tells about the universe. These are just human symbolic games. The universe itself is bigger than any of our models.
According to Zen Buddhism, and most forms of Buddhism, and quantum mechanics, any description of the universe which leaves you out is inaccurate…
Because any description of the universe, and the description of the instrument that you use to take your reading of the universe …If the only instrument you use is your own nervous system…
You’ve got to include your own nervous system in your description of the universe.
So, ergo, any model we make does not describe the universe, it describes what our brains are capable of seeing at this time.”
Quantum Language Is What it IS
“Long before quantum mechanics, the German philosopher Husserl said that all perception is gamble.
Every type of bigotry, racism, sexism, prejudice, every dogmatic ideology allows people to kill other people with a clear conscience…
And every stupid cult, every superstition-ridden religion, every kind of ignorance in the world… Are all results from not realizing that our perceptions are gambles?
We believe what we see.
Then we believe our interpretation of it.
But we don’t even know we’re making an interpretation most of the time.
We think this is reality.
Yet in philosophy, that’s called naive realism: “What I perceive is reality.”
And philosophers have refuted naive realism every century for the last 2,500 years… Starting with Buddha and Plato… while most people still act on the basis of naive realism.
Now the argument is,
“Well, maybe my perceptions are inaccurate, but somewhere there is accuracy, scientists have it with their instruments.
That’s how we can find out what’s really real.”
But relativity, quantum mechanics, have demonstrated clearly that what you find out with instruments… Is true relative only to the instrument you’re using…
As well as where that instrument is located in space-time.
So there is no vantage point from which real reality can be seen.
We’re all looking from the point of view of our own reality tunnels.
And when we begin to realize that we’re all looking from the point of view of our own reality tunnels…
We find that it is much easier to understand where other people are coming from.”
= = = = = = = = =
Wake up to Quantum-Language-Parse-Syntax-Grammar
“If you learn how to syntax your contracts you will learn self security.
Protect yourself from being harvested”.
David-Wynn: Miller, 23rd June 2010
And that, friends, is why to-day is the best time to learn Quantum-Language-Parse-Syntax-Grammar.
Because Quantum-Language-Parse-Syntax-Grammar arms you with knowledge/power to avoid arguing over any words or sentences, especially in contracts or any legal documentation.
And no one can argue.
There’s no wriggle-room. For either party on both sides of the contract.
Global consciousness is waking up with DWM’s technology of Quantum-Language-Parse-Syntax-Grammar.
3 June 2021 at 10:53 am
Thank you for sharing excellent informations. Your web-site is so cool. I’m impressed by the details that you have on this blog. It reveals how nicely you perceive this subject. Bookmarked this website page, will come back for more articles. You, my pal, ROCK! I found simply the information I already searched everywhere and simply could not come across. What a great site.
4 June 2021 at 9:57 am
Thank you, Juliano
Any questions?
Whizz ’em thru‘
10 October 2021 at 7:39 am
Jasper
Where do I find the course work to learn Parse Syntex Grammar?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Ms Drue VanLake
14 October 2021 at 7:19 am
Hello Drue,
Read each article listed here
And apply the learnings
By the end you’ll have a working knowledge of CSSCPSG
13 June 2021 at 10:27 am
Hi, I would like to subscribe for this webpage to obtain latest updates, thus where can i do it please help.
29 June 2021 at 10:34 am
Great idea
We’ll get the techies to look at doing this
22 July 2021 at 9:06 am
Yes! Finally someone writes about website.
22 July 2021 at 4:31 pm
Undeniably consider that which you said. Your favourite justification appeared to be on the web the easiest thing to remember of. I say to you, I certainly get annoyed at the same time as people consider issues that they plainly do not understand about.
You managed to hit the nail upon the top as neatly as outlined out the entire thing without having side effect , other people can take a signal.
Will probably be back to get more. Thank you
2 August 2021 at 11:00 am
Hey Lesley, some may be lost in translation
23 July 2021 at 4:13 am
I like the valuable info you supply in your articles.
I’ll bookmark your blog and check once more here frequently.
I am slightly certain I will be told lots of new stuff
right here! Good luck for the following!
2 August 2021 at 10:59 am
Yes, Renate, there’s much to absorb
25 July 2021 at 11:01 am
I couldn’t resist commenting. Exceptionally well written!
2 August 2021 at 10:57 am
Our focus is to help you develop knowledge and comprehension of CSSCPSGP.
11 August 2021 at 6:11 am
Good afternoon,
I am so deep into researching everything I can, for the past 2 years, that it’s hard to keep up with myself.
It is also very hard to discern fact from fiction, but I plow ahead with eyes, ears, and mind wide open.
I saw a video maybe a year ago, and it told the story of our flag being saved at the end of 1999, and talked about grammar, and syntax, and things I knew nothing of, so I moved on, because it wasn’t exactly what I was focused on at the time. Fast forward a year,(enough time for me to realize that EVERYTHING is connected)and I stumble across this video…….https://www.bitchute.com/video/oGGs8KOJiVVh/ ………..
After watching(and I watched the entire video) I decided to research quantum grammar. Not long into my search, I came across your website, and read until I couldn’t keep my eyes open.
So appreciative of the time and energy and effort put forth by you, to make a very confusing topic a little easier to digest in my brain!!!!!!
18 August 2021 at 6:52 am
The secret to learning about CSSCPSG is learning how to THINK.
To watch, listen, observe, and totally absorb.
This requires effort, energy and engaging the brain in serious thinking.
Most people are too lazy. They skim, looking for short cuts.
11 August 2021 at 6:49 am
Hi! I could have sworn I’ve been to this blog before but after browsing through some of the posts I realized
it’s new to me. Anyways, I’m definitely happy I stumbled upon it and I’ll be bookmarking it and
checking back regularly!
18 August 2021 at 7:13 am
Hey ben,
There’s over 60 pages of study material on the website as well as many DWM videos
freely available online
Read each page, and you’ll gain an understanding of what, how, why…
12 August 2021 at 2:03 pm
You really make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this matter to be actually something which I think I would never understand.
It seems too complex and extremely broad for me. I am looking forward for your next post,
I will try to get the hang of it!
18 August 2021 at 7:08 am
Yes, Gayle, it is quite overwhelming.
It’s all about the grammar fraud.
Knowing about the fraud is the beginning.
Proving the fraud takes study and thinking.
27 August 2021 at 4:45 am
Here is something I would like to know but have yet to receive a cogent answer.
Several languages in the world: Russian, German, Greek, Gupthrati (sp) and even Latin do not depend on word order. These languages depend on the specific ending of the word to determine its function within a sentence. E.G.
Romam et patriam animi familia amat.
This sentence can only be understood in one way and reading from left to right is NOT the correct translation of the sentence. In fact, I can readjust any word within the sentence to another location. The meaning WILL NOT CHANGE under any circumstances. You may make the claim that patriam is an adverb (#1) based on its location within the sentence. So be it. It can be moved to a different location within the sentence. This will change its part of speech from an adverb to something else, but the meaning of the word will not change.
This fact is based on over 2,000 years of study into the language starting with native speakers until now. Therefore, I pose the question:
If certain languages depend on something besides word order for meaning within the sentence and changing words within the sentence can change the function of the word, how do the two reconcile?
I have yet to receive a cogent answer, and I know why.
27 August 2021 at 8:38 am
Why you have yet to receive a cogent answer?
Or why the two reconcile?
31 August 2021 at 12:46 am
Hello, and thanks for responding.
I have not gotten a cogent reply. Again, select a word within the sentence. Assign a number to it. I will move that word to another location within the sentence, and, by the rules, thus change the part of speech of that word.
However, the fundamental meaning of the sentence will not change.
So, how does this system function with languages that are not dependent on word *location* within a sentence, and if the word’s location determines function, what happens when I move the word to a different location?
31 August 2021 at 6:13 am
“Convince a man against his will, He’s of the same opinion still.”
A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. Mary Wollstonecraft (1792)
DWM says, Learning CSSCPSG is an IQ test…
1) Perhaps start by thinking…
2) Get yourself a physical copy of big dictionary.
For example, the word “Set” has 430 definitions
Run – 396 (definitions)
Go – 368
Take – 343
3) Then ask yourself:
Does the fundamental meaning of the sentence not change?
31 August 2021 at 11:02 am
Hello, and again, thanks for the response.
I note my question: “So, how does this system function with languages that are not dependent on word *location* within a sentence, and if the word’s location determines function, what happens when I move the word to a different location?” remains unanswered.
There is one, and only one, accepted way to make this sentence have meaning based on 2,000+ years of study – spoken and written – of the language. However, using DWM’s system, I can number each word. When the word is moved, the number changes.
Now, as big dictionaries go, I have an unabridged Webster’s, a Little Liddell and Scott, a Lewis and Short, access to an OLD, with a modkin of effort, likely the OED (all 36 volumes plus indices) and God knows only how many smaller ones floating around. I feel fairly confident in the dictionary department.
The multitude of definitions certainly has bearing on meaning, but only within context of a sentence and only where the word is located within the sentence. Without word *location,* there is no concept of a meaning except for the definitions. In that case, no answer is right or wrong.
I really appreciate the opportunity you are providing me. As a trained philologist, this is fascinating.
31 August 2021 at 11:39 am
Whilst your comments may be fascinating, it’s all adverb-verb fiction and says nothing.
DWM spent many thousands of hours proving these facts.
You too, can do the same thing, by syntaxing every word in your dictionaries, to prove the grammar fraud.
1 September 2021 at 1:44 am
Thank you again for the response.
As expected, you deflect from my original question, resort to what amounts to an ad hominem and lastly, reducto ad absurdum.
I appreciate your candor and comments. May you continue to be well, and thrive.
1 September 2021 at 7:50 am
When you’ve got the facts, you’re not going to have controversy. As DWM says, “No one ever went to war over a math problem.” Yet everyday people have arguments, fights, legal battles, and wars, over words and the use of language.
DWM says that “Language Experts” will always deny his technology, because it undermines their positions and authority as linguistic specialists.
4 December 2021 at 3:21 am
I dig what you are saying and I fully agree with your concept. The human mind cannot function with out reference. It cannot understand what dark is without understanding what light is, it cannot understand what small is without understanding what large is and on and on.
The human mind can only experience something as a reality if it can experience the reference otherwise the human mind cannot experience it as real. It does this by actual fact like feeling heat of a fire knowing what hot is and knowing what cold is (less heat) by feeling ice.
But the human mind asks more questions than it can answer by experiencing fact so it will fabricate answers. This is called theory.
The human mind is so powerful that it can experience something that is not real by fabricating a reference.
This can also be considered a weakness.
In as much your theory makes all the rational sense in the world and I like it but at the same time I see no real ground being made in our war against the Evil Luciferian Powers that be.
Sergeant Robert Leroy Horton states due to QUANTUM-LANGUAGE-PARSE-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR we have won the struggle but as of today I see a national and other elections being rigged,
I see the NWO marching on taking ground.
So I ask you how is QUANTUM-LANGUAGE-PARSE-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR helping the real struggle if it has not once won a battle?
The power of Conventional Wisdom (The power of mass acceptance) is at play here.
Your Post Office, Your Flag, Your Patents all useless unless you can win some ground.
Not trying to attack but to just understand.
7 December 2021 at 12:45 pm
Great comments and feedback, thank you.
Most people cannot see what is going on. The Bible tells us:
“Let those that have eyes let them see. Let those that have ears, let them hear.”
What’s happening acoss the world today was documented around 2000 years ago in “The Revelation.” It’s a battle between GOoD and (D)evil.
Learning CSSCPSG is all about learning how to THINK. Watch. Observe. Joining the dots, putting together pieces of the puzzle, that are right under our noses.
Perpetrators are being captured…
We (the silent majority) are not privy to what’s really going on behind the scenes…
Changes are happening…
30 December 2021 at 9:32 am
This is interesting what you have to say here:
The Bible tells us:
“Let those that have eyes let them see. Let those that have ears, let them hear.”
Whereas DWM syntaxed the Lord’s Prayer and thus proved what was written is obviously incorrect. I note he has done this with treaties, the Magna Carta and several other documents.
If DWM syntaxed out a portion of the Bible and corrected it, how can we be sure what you have quoted here and in responses previous is true and factual based on the math?
I note that I am making an honest attempt to understand, but the more I attempt to understand the more I question.
Lastly, there is a video of DWM himself syntaxing a text. Is, according to the rules, is a verb. However, in the text in one place it is a pronoun (4) and an adjective (1) in another place. Again, the man who broke the math has done this.
Here is the video: [video link removed]
The two situations I reference are at: 1:06 before changing it at 1:22 and again at 6:55.Please help me understand. I want to learn.
30 December 2021 at 11:30 am
1) 99% of the written content on this website is in adverb-verb, and says “nothing” because it’s all fiction.
The remainder, written in CSSCPSGP, is FACT
As you study and learn CSSCPSGP, you’ll understand the answer to your question.
2) Find a BIG physical dictionary (not an online edition) a real printed dictionary, the thicker the better. Look up definitions of words and you’ll see some words have meanings as nouns, verbs, adjectives etc.
Bill Clinton: What Is Sex?
He answers: “What is sex?” by saying “The answer to that question is, it depends on what the definition of “IS” is.
He turns to the judge and says, “I’m just showing the American people what a verb is and what a noun is, would you like me to show them another verb and another noun?
So the judge comes back with “There’ll no further questions, this Court stands adjourned.”
When you write CSSCPSGP the only verb used being “IS” or “ARE”
It takes most people at least 200 hours of focused study to grasp this technology
There’s over 60 pages of study material on the website
Read each page, and you’ll gain an understanding of what, how, why…
Blessings,
Jasper
25 January 2022 at 1:54 pm
The “information” on this page is absolute nonsense! It should be taken down immediately!
25 January 2022 at 2:22 pm
Love it!!!
Someone using an alias and fake domain name, to give an O-Pin-Ion
= No-pin-contract.
Notice the “zero” in the url extension c 0 m.
In-forma-tion = no-form-contract.
Yup… Cor-wrekt… it’s all adverb-verb babble & says nothing… Written like this 4 UR lacking the edjamikashun, so its righten for reeders like U 2 mack it eezy 4 U 2 reed.
2 May 2023 at 4:07 am
I liкe іt when peopⅼe get togethеr and shаre views.
Great blog, continue the good work!
24 May 2023 at 7:07 am
Excellent – get a bunch of you together and you’d all benefit by completing the 7-Day Quickstart