.jpg)
The following notable person recently added to Wikipedia’s Deaths in 2025 site stands out:
David Argue (1959 – 30 July 2025) 65, actor (Razorback, Hercules Returns, Gallipoli)
His surname is an addition to the “Name is a Word” pattern cluster, and his first name is an addition to the “Remove a Letter in Name Makes a Word” pattern cluster, to provide us with “avid”,… so two words that could come to mean more by following the leads.
I was able to locate David Argue’s date of birth via his IMDb page:
David Argue (26 December 1959– 30 July 2025).
In following the leads we apply a formula— venturing to his list of films, we first look for any that were released in 1999 and 2000 (given that these years have a sequence of 3 identical numbers as per their propensity for generating clusters in groups of 3 or more. I then arrive at the one film, On the Beach: :
On the Beach is a 2000 apocalyptic drama television film directed by Russell Mulcahy and starring Armand Assante, Bryan Brown, and Rachel Ward.
The film involves a submarine and it’s crew, and so its an addition to the recent “Nautical Theme” pattern cluster, that began with my previous post involving notable persons with the surnames Sailo, Bello, Neto ,… and another Neto, that when the “Remove a Letter in Name Makes a Word” pattern cluster is applied, we get “sail, bell and net (x2)”, … words that have a common “nautical” theme.
Via Argue’s timely death, the inner twin world are indicating that we’re on the ”wright” track.
Our next leads are the five notable persons mentioned in the first sentence above from the films wikipedia page. In a case like this, I usually begin by investigating the first person mentioned, which is Russell Mulcahy, butt there was another who stood out — the surname “Brown” given the recent “Colour Theme” pattern cluster that began with my recent July 23 post entitled, Black, White, Grey, …and Bright?!. I should note that my previous post included another notable death this month that does jives:
- Andrea Bruno (11 January 1931 – 6 July 2025) 94, Italian architect
His surname Bruno means “brown” and also it becomes “brun” with the “o” removed, another word that means “brown” in other languages. Although he fit into the “Surnames Ending with ‘o’” pattern cluster, I didn’t see at the time, how Brun fit into the nautical sense… unless the reference is to “brown ocean”— from debris being stirred up … or as I have since learned of— the Brown Ocean Effect.
Note from Brown’s wikipedia page:
Bryan Neathway Brown (born 23 June 1947)
I then turned to investigating Mulcahy’s wikipedia page:
Russell Mulcahy (born 23 June 1953)
We now have a “June 23 (x2)/Date Sequence” pattern cluster. In the works. This is a prompt for us to investigate the June 23rd wikipedia page for the intended person(s), by using the formula as per usual. In this case the formula brings us to only two individuals, one born in 1888 and the other born in 2000– years that have 3 identical numbers in sequence. Note from their wiki pages:
- 1888 – Bronson M. Cutting (June 23, 1888 – May 6, 1935) publisher, politician
- 2000 – Peter Dubovský (7 May 1972 – 23 June 2000) Slovak footballer (born 1972)
Note the name Bronson means “brown son” in origin! Again we are on the “wright” track— the domino effect!! We definitely have a “Brown in Name” pattern cluster in the works. As well, note their other dates that generate a “__, May 6, 7, __/Date Sequence” pattern cluster. The name “Cutter” and the “pet” and “sky” found in Peter Dubinsky are also designed to factor in.
Also, June 23 is an addition to a cluster that began with yesterdays post, that expands now into a:
“January 23, __, March 23,__, …, Jun3 23(x2), July 23 (x3),…, __, October 23, November 23, December 23(x2)/ 23rd Day, Month Sequence” pattern cluster.
On perusing the list of other actors in the film, one stood out:
- Charlie Clausen (born 31 July 1977) as Seaman Byers
The confrontation rule, also known as the rule in Brown v Dunn, states that where a party is advancing a theory that contradicts the testimony of a particular witness being questioned, the counter-version must be put to the witness.[1] More specifically, the witness should have "an opportunity to address or explain the point upon which credibility is attacked." [2] The rule prevents a witness from being "ambushed."
To be continued…
No comments:
Post a Comment