Skip to main content

Numerology: the significance of 8647


As is now all-too-well known, the executive branch of the US government has put its resources behind the proposition that the numbers "8647" lined out with seashells, must to any reasonable person be seen as a threat to kill the 47th President. 

Hmmm. So far as I could tell from the infamous photo, we're supposed to take them to be 8 6 47.  Month, day, year.  Did anything of importance worth memorializing on a North Carolina beach happen on an 8/6/47? 

Nothing much from August 6, 1947, I'm afraid.  Except that a great cornerback for the Cincinnati Bengals, Ken Riley, was born on that date. He was posthumously admitted to the Football Hall of Fame in 2023.

We get to something more promising if we step back a century. During the Mexican War, on August 6, 1847 the US marines began a march on Mexico City under the command of Lt. Colonel Samuel Watson.  This historic tidbit does have some visibility or, rather, audibility, because it is the reason the Marine Corps band constantly reminds us of the "halls of Montezuma." THAT march began on an 8/6/47.

History of Our Corps - August 6 - A Gathering of Gyrenes

So, for all I know, the seashells were first placed in that position by a Marine vet or a kin of a Marine vet to whom they meant, roughly, "Semper Fi."

Okay -- that is an arbitrary supposition of mine, based on about two minutes of googling.  Do you know what is great about it, though?  I do not have at my command (and would not employ if, oddly, I did) the machinery of criminal prosecution, so I can do nothing to enforce my take on those digits.

Cool.  

Labels:

Comments

  1. HenryMay 5, 2026 at 5:53 AM

    The media rarely note that, even if "8647" referred to assassinating Trump, it is inarguably not a "true threat" as the term is used legally. At most, it would be a statement of opinion that he should be assassinated and would be fully protected by the First Amendment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ChristopherMay 5, 2026 at 7:58 AM

      WATTS v. UNITED STATES (1969) comes to mind.

      Delete
  2. HenryMay 5, 2026 at 8:22 AM

    The Wikipedia article, "True Threats," states that Watts was prosecuted for saying, " "[i]f they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J." The Supreme Court found that that statement was not a true threat but was protected speech under the First Amendment. At https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_threat

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ChristopherMay 5, 2026 at 4:14 PM

      Yes. I suspect this indictment will never get near a trial.

      Delete
  3. HenryMay 5, 2026 at 4:27 PM

    Blanche’s bad faith in bringing the indictment is so egregious as to warrant his disbarment.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
10 comments
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
23 comments
Read more

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable a...
Post a Comment
Read more