Javier,
I did check out your website and find it funny that you are possibly
the only one on this board who claims to BELIEVE in time travel
wholeheartedly yet you are the one who spends all of his board time
trying to convince us sheep that John is a fraud. You may be the only
one who isn’t skeptical. You are truly the only fanatic, so far, on
this board. John has hooked you good. The rest of us keep an open mind
(something you should consider), learn what we can and have a good time
in the process. You seem on the point of a nervous breakdown. I have
also considered the possibility that you just want as much attention as
possible and are jealous of the position John holds on the board. This
stance gets you more feedback than you would otherwise get. This may be
a subliminal motive. Isn’t there something else you want to do here
just in case time travel is as real as you think it is?
I’ll take a fraudulant time traveller over an evangelist anyday.
Baa Baa
Lola
[Edited by Lola Montez on 03-01-2001 at 09:34 AM]
Posted by Javier Cortez on 03-01-2001 09:58 AM
Lola,
Your last post smells like revenge to me. This must be for what I
said to you last time. Sorry, but it was the truth. And people say I’m
harsh and hostile. I think you just took that title away from me.
I don’t care about the attention, like I said before I can care less
what others think about me. And I have no subliminal motive, because
that would go against everything I stand for.
Since my birth I have gone through experiences that cannot be explained
by psychologist. Ever see “The Sixth Sense.” Notice how angry he gets
and writes those hateful words. Well maybe you wouldn’t think it’s so
funny if you stand on the opposite end of something like that.
And as for me being jealous of John, that’s not likely. Why would I be
jealous of a Time Traveler? I hate Time Travelers. And despite all his
intelligence and fans, I still manage to out wit him now and then, and
post questions that he can’t answer. I’m very happy being who I am
.Even though the visions and manifestations get out of hand at times,
I’m fortunate to have this life, a good family and friends.
Posted by John Titor on 03-01-2001 11:31 AM
BOB (from 18):
I must preface the following with a bit of melodrama. I feel a bit
unqualified to answer the next few questions for the following reason.
The way you and I look at life and death and its relative value is
radically different. As any other soldier can tell you, once you watch
a man’s arm come off from a bullet you just fired or have been close
enough to feel someone’s last breath on your face, it changes you. I
can only describe it in two distinct waves. The first feeling is power.
You won when it counted and survived. All the personal shortcomings and
faults you’ve carried with you your whole life just melt away in a
savage euphoria. If there’s time to think about it, the next wave comes
shortly after and is underlined by overwelming guilt. You just killed
someone and now God might be ticked off. Fortunately, the second
feeling goes away quickly when the shooting starts again and gets
shorter and shorter after every battle. After all, why would God put
you in this situation? The point is, I personally do not like going
through that cycle and the decisions I make about life and death might
not be the ones you would expect me to make.
((How come it doesn’t bother you that people may die through your
inaction yet you find it “morally wrong” that you might affect lives by
active involvement?))
I’m not sure I said it didn’t bother me, I only stated I won’t
interfere on purpose. Again I refer to a historical example. Before
Pearl Harbor was attacked in 1941, a small group of US soldiers were
experimenting with a new technology called RADAR. As the Japanese
planes were flying toward the island, they actually picked them up in
time to thwart the surprise attack. Unfortunately, they were unfamiliar
with the equipment and figured it wasn’t working correctly. As you are
aware, the ruthlessness of the Japanese “sneak” attack galvanized the
US people into entering WWII.
As a time traveler it would be easy for me to take a short hike up
that hill where the RADAR operators were and point out to them that
indeed the equipment was working just fine and they should probably
call it in. Assuming they believed me, it is arguable that my lone
single action could start a chain of events that would allow the US to
meet the Japanese planes and stop them from attacking the battleships.
As a result, the US people would still be angry but not motivated to
enter the war fully since the Japanese were not a precieved threat.
Thus, you don’t begin research on the atomic bomb until well after
Hitler has already dropped a couple on London.
I could save thousands of men on the Arizona at the cost of millions in
London. I just don’t know how one life will affect another. However, if
I were standing next to a soldier who was about to be shot by a passing
Japanese plane, I would push him to safety. I realize this is
inconsistent on a small scale but I am tired of watching people die in
front of me. If there is a price to pay for that than so be it.
((Isn’t it just as morally wrong to affect lives through inaction as it is through action? Hint: The answer is YES.))
Why are you concerned about what I might do to corrupt your
worldline when you have no problem letting other people do it around
you every day? Do you blame yourself for not taking any action right
now to “save” people living on your streets or suffering from poverty
and disease? Besides, how exactly would you propose I decide who to
tell and who not to tell? (provided I knew anything at all).
((Your immediate decision, in itself, is its own authority.))
What God judges about my decision is the only authority. Again, all the things you claim I can do you are capable of also.
((If good and evil achieve a balance in the larger picture, as you
suspect, and all life is “God” experiencing physical manifestation, the
question of you being required to decide who lives or dies is moot.))
It’s not moot to me. To tell you the truth, I’m afraid. I don’t
want the responsibility of being expected to know who lives and who
dies. I know it would change me for the worse. Besides, how can you be
sure my “inaction” now isn’t a result of something I’ve already screwed
up and I’m trying to fix it? Javier might be right after all. Thanks
for the good questions.
I am on Lola’s question at the top of 19.
Posted by Stephen McKay on 03-01-2001 05:23 PM
Javier,
I’ve been following this thread from the start, but only posted
once or twice. I had a read of your site. Let me see if I can get this
straight – It’s not so much that you don’t believe John is a Time
Traveller, you just wish to uncover his secret agenda? I don’t mean to
sound sarcastic, from what I read on your site you seem to believe in
Time Travel, you’re just not a fan of it.
I’ll make sure that this is where you’re coming from before I comment on it…
Steve
Posted by Javier Cortez on 03-01-2001 07:49 PM
Stephen, or do you prefer Steve?
Yes, I do strongly believe in time travel. And it’s not so much
that I believe John is a time traveler as well, but yes I like
uncovering people’s lies when they make grand accusations like that. So
far, I have to say John is very clever. But personally I don’t like
Time Travelers, so I can’t be like you or the rest and listen to him.
Basically like I said, I’m a paradox. My way of thinking may at times
be inconsistent, but that’s how I have always been. It’s my curse. To
believe in something, and experience it first hand, and to then shake
it off and say it’s not real.
Sorta like a double personality, but not really. But I’m not crazy
, I can however get really angry at times.I guess I’m just following in the footsteps of my great great great
great great great great great ancestor. I’m someone with conviction,
just how he was. And if it weren’t for him, there would be no Mexico.
Not that he was a good man, and not that he was a bad man either. He
was a man with great conviction.
I try and do as I see morally right with my conviction. And I always choose integrity above all else.
Javier C.
Posted by Daniel Kirkbride on 03-01-2001 09:42 PM
Javier,
I am curious as to what drives you to so passionately need to “save”
people from what they want. To over simplify things for the sake of
brevity, some are following this thread in the pursuit of entertainment
and their own curiosity, and others are willing to buy whatever snake
oil is closest at hand to make their lives more interesting. Exploring
possibilities and boundaries is both healthy and fun. On the occasion
that it becomes unhealthy and obsessive, well that’s just natural
selection. At least in this situation those more prone to get carried
away are free to choose their own poison in whatever dose they see fit.
You yourself being a perfect example. Besides, if everything john says
is absolutely true, what harm has been done? Any changes in this
particular world line are specific and inevitable and alterations are
only alterations to those with the perspective of light cones dipped a
couple of degrees off the beaten path. For those naturally in our
specific world line the only change made is the change that was going
to be made anyway. For john any change does not affect his own world
line for the same reasons. The only change is in the degree of
difference between these two lines, which is only evident from an
outside perspective, but that variance is absolute. In short, it is
possible to go back in time and kill you parents, but only by traveling
to the world line where that is what happens. You can then decide out
of remorse to go back and kill yourself to save your parents, but only
by going to the world line where you do that. However this does not
change the world line where you successfully commit parricide, because
in that line they did die. Future and past within a specific world line
is absolute. Time travel merely grants the traveler the unique ability
to recognize variances between world lines. Therefore, any changes to
our world line are actually not really changes, because our tomorrow
will be what it is going to be and will not change when looking at it
from the perspective of the day after tomorrow. So no matter how
insidious or innocuous johns “secret agenda” is, he cannot affect any
changes that he is not going to affect anyway. It’s a battle that can’t
be won because in our future it already has or has not been. I know
this all sounds a little convoluted, but the mathematics behind it all
are actually rather simple. Which brings me to a question for John.
John,
I don’t mean to suggest that I accept any of what you claim, but I do
have a technical question. Are the singularities in your machine
supposed to be offsetting the light cones of particles within it’s
sphere of influence allowing the world lines of these particles to
appear to loop form the perspective of particles outside the effected
area? I don’t mean to insult you by spelling out the obvious to you so
basically, but that seems the most obvious need of a singularity. If
so, how can you account for generating a gravity well deep enough to
create such a disparity between light cones without sucking the planet
through the eye of a needle? Also, this requires motion through the
space immediately influenced by the mass, yet you claim travel is
accomplished while the traveler is stationary. I look forward to your
response….
Posted by Stephen McKay on 03-01-2001 10:02 PM
Javier,
Probably prefer Steve, but it doesn’t really bother me. As far as I
can see John is not making accusations but claims. I also think it is
important to uncover deception, but I’m not sure what makes you so sure
that John is lying.
He may slip up, but he’s only human, as are we all. I just don’t
think the point lies in whether or not John is from the future. He’s
made his claim and unfortunately there is no proof either way. As much
as you may believe it, I don’t think you can use his posts to disprove
his claims, nor can they be used to prove them.
The point is that what he says is fascinating. Millions of people
go to see psychics and fortune tellers, not because they believe they
are seers and everything they say is true, but because they are
curious. I think that is the same attitude of most people asking
questions of John. If John did tell us of a company whose worth jumps
drastically in the next few years, I honestly doubt that anyone on this
thread would invest their savings in that company.
They’re not devoting their lives to John’s words, they’re just
interested. As I said earlier, if John’s telling the truth, then we all
get a sneak peek and preparation for the future; if not, then all we
get is an entertaining story. If we read this thread in that light,
then we have nothing to lose.
Steve
Posted by Michael E. Hendrickson on 03-01-2001 10:32 PM
Regarding your 2-21-01 comments on my first post,i.e.,
that I should view the video “Waco,The Rules Of Engagement” to get
a better understanding and appreciation(I suppose)for federal law
enforcement personnel acting criminally beyond the pale. And ,you asked
rhetorically,( I may be paraphrasing somewhat) “if the allegations made
in this piece were proven to be true, what would you hope would happen,
nothing?”
My answer to that is that if these allegations were proven to be
true I would not have hope, but rather every confidence that our
criminal justice system would prosecute and convict whoever the
criminal perpetrators turned out to be, whether federal cops, or
otherwise(thereby obviating the need for citizen uprisings).
The ATF,followed by the FBI, clearly blundered at
Waco, causing the needless deaths of some 80 of our citizenry. However, to charge these federal officers
with criminal violations of the law either directly or
impliedly as is done in this video, simply doesn’t accord with the real facts. Actually, there’s some evidence now
to suggest that not only the FBI, but other federal as well as
state and local law enforcement agencies have learned something from
the Waco tragedy, and will take great care not to repeat it.
This, of course, goes directly against your predicted scenario for the next 11 years, which posits a series of
Waco type events crescendoing ,finally, in a full blown civil war,
with honest citizenry from the heartland (with shotguns, I suppose)
battling the evil forces of our federal government
Baloney! This is the typical paranoid militiaman mentality which manifests itself often in your writings,in
references to federal policemen conducting illegal searches
and engaging in other depredations against innocent
citizens. I guess all these things happen after our Constitution is suspended, and our republlican form of
democratic government, now 225 years old, all comes crashing
down in less than a dozen years, under your projected scenario. More nonsense.
Perhaps, your mentor and guide is that goofball from West Virginia
(I can’t recall his name)who has written and sold a militiaman’s manual
of sorts,and which I think makes many of the same kinds of predictions
which you have been making. I know that I previously wrote that I
thought,
perhaps, the inspiration for your story of our near future was a
science fiction novel. However, now that I’ve given the matter some
further thought,I beleve a good part of
it may come from this militiaman’s manual. MH
[Edited by Michael E. Hendrickson on 03-01-2001 at 11:11 PM]
Posted by Javier Cortez on 03-01-2001 11:43 PM
I can save you all a bunch of rhetoric. It’s a matter of principal that drives me.
I don’t believe John is a Time Traveler. It’s the principal behind
it all that motivates me to question him though. It’s what makes my
blood boil; it’s my outlet to speak out. And like I said before, maybe
if you’ve gone through what I have, you’d also want to protest Time
Travel.
Time Travel = Exploitation
Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-01-2001 11:45 PM
I’ll be gone soon. I really do not have time for this. First of all,
to Rick, everyone wants to protect their family. The reason I can not
buy into this is: if John is making up a story, it is a very wrong
thing to do. The interests of the day are the same ones from back in
the ’50s. People were building bomb shelters, and by the 1960′s, I was
there, everyone thought that no one would survive a nuclear war. It is
self-evident. The US alone has more nuclear weapons that would blow up
this Planet a 100 times over. I had 32 nuclear missiles aimed at me
every second of every minute of every hour of every day for the thirty
years this Cold War was going on. By the 1970′s smiling Pres. Jimmy
Carter said, “Its MAD”, Mutual Assured Destruction. If we are to have a
War, we will not stop until everything is utterly completely destroyed
for we can not win a Nuclear War. Carl Sagan came out in the 1980′s and
said if too many nuclear missiles are released in even a limited
nuclear war that it would cause a nuclear winter. If anyone survived,
there would be no food, and like in the past when the dinasours
disappeared, humans would just die off. No one wins in a Nuclear War.
In the 1980′s Pres. Reagan said exactly that, “If you launch, we
launch, if we launch, you launch”. “NO ONE WINS”. Everyone dies. We
will start Star Wars, to protect ourselves. Of course Star Wars the
movie was out in 1980 and told us about something new, a new way of
looking at things, yes, the Force. Use the Force. What do you think
people have been doing? It commonly referred to as a Relaxation
Response Method. You block out negative thoughts coming into your head,
by conscious effort, and say something like “Cancel, cancel.” This
takes practice and effort to reprogram your brain. What we have now in
the US is people who do not know these techniques. We have been doing
this since about 1985. Star Wars Reagan began a process that nuclear
weapons would be reduced. Now in the 1990′s, Saddem was not going to
get by with his “Naked Agression” and thats exactly what Pres. Bush
meant. Now Pres. Clinton signed an Accidental Nuclear Release Treaty
with Pres. Boris Yelstein. If terrorists get ahold of a nuclear device,
we will call first, to avoid an all out exchange of nuclear missiles.
Some in the US, as some in Russia, think a Nuclear War is winable, IT
IS NOT. This has been proven time and time again. Yet minor countries
like North Korea or major countries like China or India or Pakistan
want to continue on with developing longer ranged nuclear missiles.
They already have them. The point is the SDI defense, making nuclear
missiles obsolete. How? That’s easy. It’s still the same with the US.
We have more nuclear weapons than Russia. If anyone launches a all out
War, the US will literally destroy this entire Planet. AND WE MEAN IT.
We have lived it, so when someone comes and says I am from the future,
and there is a Nuclear War and a Civil War, I say “Bull”. Every country
in this world knows that the US will destroy this entire Planet if it
needs too. There will not be a limited Nuclear War in my estimation.
Having all lived through this 50 years of crap, makes us not be
interested by annoying people claiming this or that after having a Cold
War with Russian leaders. We are not amused at this type of behavior.
This will not cause a Civil War, or a Nuclear War, got it.
Posted by John Titor on 03-02-2001 05:46 AM
DANIEL:
((Are the singularities in your machine supposed to be offsetting the
light cones of particles within it’s sphere of influence allowing the
world lines of these particles to appear to loop form the perspective
of particles outside the effected area?))
No, that’s not how it works. The singularities are used to manipulate
gravity around the observer. The singularities do not interact with any
matter except the electrons that are injected onto its event horizon.
The hazardous areas of gravity are quite small and exist only around
the inner singularity ring and another area created in the gravity
sinusoid outside the vehicle.
((I don’t mean to insult you by spelling out the obvious to you so
basically, but that seems the most obvious need of a singularity.))
No insult taken. I would imagine we both agree that standing behind an operating jet engine is an unhealthy thing to do also.
((If so, how can you account for generating a gravity well deep enough
to create such a disparity between light cones without sucking the
planet through the eye of a needle?))
The gravity well created by the singularities is not that large.
The portion of the field that is felt by the operator is about the
equivalent of 2 Gs. I would urge you to examine a Penrose diagram for a
Kerr black hole. As you are probably aware, the singularity is donut
shaped and exhibits two event horizons. The singularities are used to
“simulate” a path through the center of one of these singularities
which is what takes the observer to an alternate worldline. Earlier in
the thread I did go into this in a bit more detail.
((Also, this requires motion through the space immediately influenced
by the mass, yet you claim travel is accomplished while the traveler is
stationary.))
The unit must be stationary during operation due to the sensitivity
of the gravity sensors. Any motion with an acceleration component would
throw the gravity measurement from the signularities off.
Posted by Joe Applebaum on 03-02-2001 06:12 AM
I’m new and I didn’t get a chance to read every post up to this point, so I’m sorry if my questions are repeats.
1. Could you explain your theory about worldlines? Are there
infinite worldlines? Are all worldlines separate or
connected to each other in some way?
2. Where did you attend High school and what year did you
graduate? Was it difficult?
3. What college did you attend, what year did you graduate?
Would you estimate that your college life was similar to
ours in our worldline?
4. Hypothetically: If you fell in love with someone here
(lets say Pamela) and you took her “back to the future” with you
in your timex machine, wouldn’t that act upset both of our worldlines
especiall if she were pregnant? Or all of the worldlines,assuming time
travel is possible? Conversly, If you were gay and you took a gay man
back with you, would that disrupt the worldlines less, assuming the
both you could not bear offspring.
5. Have you had a chance to watch a movie here that you had
already seen in your 2036 wordline? If so, did they have
the same endings?
Thank You, looking foward to your replies.
Posted by Bob Marz on 03-02-2001 06:45 AM
John: Thanks for your response. I understand the dilemma and
paradoxes involved in the moral questions. I’m still not convinced,
though, that of the two basic choices of involvement/noninvolvement
when faced with an immediate moral dilemma, you find inaction okay but
action (active intervention) suspect. I don’t see why you don’t regard
them equally.
Example: I’m at a blind intersection and I see a bus barreling down on
a man who’s crossing the street. Would God condone me staying out of it
because I feared the moral ramifications of the myriad future
scenarios? This kind of second-guessing would prevent any immediate
action. Lifeguards, firemen and cops would be rendered obsolete. With
such a standard I could leave a kitten up a tree, a wandering child
outside on a cold night, a blind woman headfirst in a snowbank, on and
on, because I really don’t know what affect these living beings will
have on future events.
How can a God expect you to be omniscient, that’s His job. Since you’re
not omniscient you’re not responsible, which is what I meant by “moot.”
There are an infinite amount of variables. Therefore the Pearl
Harbor scenario is ambiguous. You don’t know that involvement of a
timetraveller would prevent a nation’s motivation. Or that it wouldn’t.
Or that your inaction is any more moral than involvement.
What concerns me is that your reasoning endorses any sort of
noninvolvement in day-to-day events – yes, even cowardice. All the
lives that Schindler saved, for example? He should have simply stayed
out of it because one of their descendants might someday become a
second Hitler? I’m sure those he saved would have a different opinion.
I need to think about this more.
Posted by Rick Donaldson on 03-02-2001 08:01 AM
Javier: [Well Rick, you seem to have a passionate belief in
something as well. Yet you blame me for having the same zest. You
accuse me of being harsh; yeah maybe I was just a tad. But you call
these people who want to take away the second amendment “nuts,” how do
you think they will feel about you saying that? So I see it as
something one in the same. ]
Javier, I do have a passionate belief in something – the
Constitution. But, you misunderstand a bit. I’m not BLAMING anyone for
anything. Let me see if I can say this simply… we all want to learn
something. By you (or anyone) denying outright the existence of
something – or attacking it directly as a “bad thing” without listening
to both sides, you deny the chance for observation, and therefore,
learning. Nothing against your methods, but, to put the problem into
the perspective that “this is simply wrong” without back up
justification for it being wrong – other than your own perception
(which some of us might not understand) makes it hard for anyone to
follow the story. I just have a problem with anyone lumping EVERYONE
that doesn’t have the same beliefs as that person (doing the
‘lumping’), in the same category.
As for your example of my calling the anti-gun people “nuts” – it
isn’t the same thing. We do not know the “history of time travel” but
we DO know the history of Europe and America and that many, many times
history has shown that tyrants take arms from the people to keep
themselves in power. This has been repeated over and over throughout
history. Our history, our time line. So, I could care less if they are
“upset” by me calling them nuts. They are, plain and simple, ignorant
people who do not know or understand their own history – and who use
emotionalism to take something away. They are wrong and by my
defination they are nuts. You are calling everyone sheep who are going
along with the story line here, because they are curious, wish to
learn, understand or perhaps even believe that there is some truth to
the story. There is nothing wrong with someone following along or
playing along with the story, it certainly does not make them sheep.
The difference is, we do not know for certain Time Travelers can
affect the world time line of ourselves. If they can and do, we
WOULDN’T KNOW IT! If, as in John’s example, he goes up the hill and
helps the Radar folks (and I’m very familiar with not only this
particular story, I’m familiar with various historical changes that
MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED because I’ve written a paper on that VERY subject
many years ago in college) – then there might have been changes that
would have prevented us from entering the war, developing the bomb
before Hitler and perhaps we would all be speaking German today. So if
that happened because of a time traveler… would we know it? How do we
know that someone DIDN’T interfere already ALLOWING US TO WIN THE WAR?
We do not know this.
Michael E. Hendrickson: Just a couple quick comments, because I am
not sure I understand where you’re coming from. Apparently you have a
problem with “militia” people. I’ll tell you this from my point of
view, with 26 years of military and goverment service, having sworn to
protect and defend the Constitution. I have been on both sides of this
fence. The Constitution is first. Before anything else. Militia people
- those who fancy themselves as protectors of the Constitution – are.
They are very keen on what is going on in the world today. They will be
backed up by military members should a “civil war” ever occur in this
country. The military will protect the Constitution first. You see, the
government is by, of and for the people – meaning that people run it.
People are part of this country and people are corruptable, regardless
of your belief that they aren’t.
In the past six months, several illegal raids by the BATF have occurred
in Mesa, Arizon. I will give you the opportunity to look up the
information yourself, because you won’t find it in the normal media.
But you will find that people like the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
organizations have been tracking these things. So, the government, run
by people who make mistakes DO MAKE MISTAKES. And they need to get
their act together before a lot more people become aware of their
mistakes. I don’t care if you’re anti-gun or not, that’s fine. But if
you are (not you personally, but “you” in the generic sense) then you
are unaware of the GOOD that guns can do – or simply do not care (this
is not directed at you Michael, but the general anti-gun people who say
things similar to what you did).
And for the record – just because you’re paranoid, it doesn’t mean
people ARE NOT OUT TO GET YOU! Remember that. A little paranoia goes a
long way to keeping people honest. That is a fact. In my current
position, if I WEREN’T paranoid, I couldn’t get my job done!!!!!!!!!!!!
Albert Cattoir: Albert, I’m not sure if you were trying to teach me
something or not. You didn’t tell me anything I did not already know
and understand. Let me tell you something… I have lived in Detroit
Michigan, Oklahoma City, Washington, DC and Colorado Springs – among
other places. All of those places had dozens of nuclear warheads
pointed at them during the cold war. Some STILL have nukes aimed at
them (specifically where I live now, at NORAD. So, like you I’ve lived
under that shroud as well.
I was there with Reagan and Bush. I wear a belt buckle George H. W.
Bush gave me just prior to his inaguration – not that it has bearing on
this conversation, but it shows at least to me and my family that I’ve
been there through some of the most important moments of history in the
20th century. I was there when the wall fell. I was there when the
Iranian rescue mission failed. I was there, and shot at several times,
during the contra days in the late ’70s. I understand and fully aggree
with the old SDI projects, and now NMD. That’s my job… I want it to
succeed and work. I would love nothing more than to see nuclear weapons
become an obselete, even archane and useless weapon.
So, please do not assume that because you were there, the rest of us were not. As to your last comments….
[There will not be a limited Nuclear War in my estimation. Having all
lived through this 50 years of crap, makes us not be interested by
annoying people claiming this or that after having a Cold War with
Russian leaders. We are not amused at this type of behavior. This will
not cause a Civil War, or a Nuclear War, got it.]
In your estimation – opinion, there will not. In MY estimation – it
CAN happen and will if the opportunity presents itself to those who
wish to see American fall.
Denial, however, is a symptom from which we all suffer from time to
time. We do not want to see bad things come to pass and therefore deny
it can possibly happen. Civil war can be caused by many things. In our
country – a place considered by us Americans to be the best place in
the world to live, it hasn’t happened since the 1870s… a barbaric
time in history. Now, we believe we are above that. I hope we are.
However, look around you. Examine the distrust people have for a
growingly powerful government that can arrest you for even THINKING bad
thoughts today. The so-called “Hate Crimes” bills they keep trying to
pass are a good example. Who cares what you and I think about each
other, or someone else? Only those who feel “threatened” by our
thoughts. Why should I bow down to someone who believes I SHOULD NOT
THINK A CERTAIN WAY? Civil war is not only POSSIBLE in this country, if
trends in social behavior continue, and government continues to grow at
an exponential rate, taking more and more of YOUR MONEY then more and
more people will become dissatisfied.
Limited nuclear war is NOT impossible and under some circumstances,
very probable. You seem to forget that our national policy is to use
nuclear weapons if attacked by anyone with any weapons of mass
destruction. That is, if some city in the US, or military personnel (or
embassy) were attacked with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons,
our response would be swift, and severe. A nuclear strike on the
perpetrators WILL happen. At that point it becomes a limited nuclear
war. (If something I saw yesterday has any truth, then we were so close
to a nuclear war during the Kursk incident, you people will pee your
pants!)
John’s being on this forum and making the claims he makes points
out that there are indeed social problems today with which we all live.
Those social problems, indeed the world problems we observe all around
us from Israel to Russia, from Central America to Washington DC show
that we live in an unstable world, in the 21st Century. Our actions -
those actions of individuals – touch the lives of many, many others
around us. People we know and do not know will be touched by one thing
you do today.
If John is a time traveler, out of his own time line, then he exists
here today because of something some scientists did some time ago, just
as some people, perhaps entire families DO NOT EXIST TODAY because of
the actions of some other scientists in 1945 at the Trinity site in New
Mexico.
Today might be the day that a new Einstein is born, or dies due to
an accident. Today might be they day aliens land and make first
contact. I doubt that any of these things will happen, but that doesn’t
make it impossible. Keeping our minds open to the possibilities of WHAT
MIGHT BE only helps us to prevent the evil things that might befall the
human race. To deny that evil can happen, denies good the chance to
defend itself.
Posted by John Titor on 03-02-2001 08:07 AM
I plan to address the previous questions in more detail but I thought this was interesting and might add something.
Lola States: ((I postulate that you actually do not have any more of an
advantage or responsibility than the person who grabs someone who is
about to step off the curb and get hit by a bus. I would not stop and
think ‘gee, I don’t know, do they deserve to be saved from the fate of
a roadkill?’ A doctor or priest does not take it upon himself to decide
who should be helped. A jet pilot doesn’t stop to think “Hey, air
travel is pretty unnatural, these people should have to walk and row
their way to Paris. I am messing with the way time and space is
perceived and the nature of reality with this form of transportation.”
Time travel is just another form of transportation in one sense. Our
possible new ability to time travel in the future may not seem any more
exotic than our ability to access other cultures is now.))
I agree with this also.
((Why is it different than using a jet to go to a primitive tribe
and give them, say, antiobiotics. (never mind the problems with
antibiotics)It is a high tech way of interfering with a culture. Who
cares what time zone. Ethically isn’t it the same?))
JIM:
(( Are you posting on other (non time travel related) boards
without revealing your status as a time traveler? Is the conversation
as interesting? What are your conclusions so far?))
Not really, there are a number of science rooms and other chats I
do visit and just sit and watch. I have discovered that people who
frequent this board and some others have the most open and creative
minds. I realize no one actually believes me but they are still able to
look past that and ask some very important and interesting questions.
CRAIG:
((… are, or were, you in contact with TTs in 2036, and if so, what
percentage of the people accept it as possible? After the flight of the
Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk, it took 10 plus years for people to
accept it as anything more than just an urban myth.))
The general public was informed about time travel around 2034. Yes,
I have had conversations with other time travelers on my home
worldline. Your insight on the public is more or less correct. I would
say 60% of the people realize what it is and the possible implications,
20% of the people don’t care, 10% don’t believe it and another 10% see
it as something that should be banned and stopped.
DOUG:
((Likewise, imagine if a time traveler from the future came to this time period and told us the secret of time travel.))
Yes, imagine that. Do you think that would be a good thing or a bad thing?
RICK:
((John – commercials. They are ignorant commercials. In fact,
almost every commercial on television these days are either totally
stupid (so they come out funny), or they are aimed at people whose
humor suffers from being “in the black” a lot. Black humor seems to be
the way things go these days. I don’t much care for it.))
Back in the 50s and 60s, television commercials were pretty
straightforward. Usually along the lines of, “Cheese! It’s good! Buy
cheese.” In the 70s, there was more identification with a producer or
trademark but the commercials were still pretty easy to understand.
“Buy this beer, it tastes great!” Today, I have no idea what some
commercials are advertising until they show the logo at the end. Do you
find this more effective? Only recently have I seen this move toward
dark humor. I’ve never seen anything like it before, even in “your”
archives in 2036.
FLIP top of 20
Posted by Lola Montez on 03-02-2001 12:01 PM
Rick,
Your post brought to mind a conversation I had with a woman from
Yugoslavia several years ago just a few months before the war started
there. She was very adamant that there could be no real civil strife.
Everyone got along very well, there were mixed marriages, mixed
neighborhoods and in general everyone and everything was very
civilized. Not a year later they were in a full civil war and doing
unimaginable things to one another.
This woman was a University philosophy professor who had spent her entire life in Yugoslavia.
As you say, anything can happen.
People are the same EVERYWHERE. It is foolish to imagine that
things that happen in Cambodia, Yugoslavia, Africa and have happened
here are now no longer possible because we are now so evolved and
civilized. History has the most important lessons for us yet we are
unable to learn from them (or maybe it is truly impossible for us to
change). But one thing is for sure-History repeats itself.
Lola
Posted by Rick Donaldson on 03-02-2001 01:13 PM
Lola… you’re right, and I think you said what I was trying to say in a short note. Thanks.
In America, we look around us and see a civilized society – where
gangs, criminals and hoodlums carry guns illegally every day, and USE
THEM – but law-abiding, non-violent people are denied the ease of
obtaining or carrying weapons with which to defend themselves.
Obviously, this is not everywhere. I think 37 states now have Right
to Carry laws now. Colorado, where I live has limited issue licenses
for concealed weapons.
The point here is that LITTLE things like this challenge us every
day. People somehow feel that “a new law” will fix a problem, when
really, only common sense – and an understanding of previous laws would
really fix the problem. I bring the weapons situation up, because it is
a daily concern in my life, as well as the lives of many around me. It
is a “hot button” issue for a LOT of people. You either want gun
control or you want no gun control.
There are those who want to be in the middle (like a certain
Congressman who hears from me weekly anymore) and concern yourself with
“common sense gun laws” – which still ban guns to some extent.
These hot button issues cause people to get upset and DO SOMETHING
about the situation. Sometimes one side takes it futher than the other
side, which then escalates the situation.
No… there is no reason to believe that we will never have another
civil war in this country, and there is definately no reason to believe
there will never be a nuclear strike on ourselves or another country.
Whether or not either of these scenarios would be survivalable is
debatable but moot – since the possibilities exist that civil war,
and/or nuclear war (whether limited or all-out) still exist.
The American or Western culture to which most of us posting here
belong, are different in some ways than other countries. But, we are
all still human. Humans make mistakes, misinterpert information, and
humans simply in large numbers have differences of opinions. Humans…
kill their own kind too.
Sorry for getting a bit off topic, but I’m still stuck on the Time
Traveler Predictions John has given us. While John might not be a real
time traveler, I can see merit in his statements.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário