The American Civil War of 2005 as predicted by John Titor

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
so if he only mentioned federal police once, it doesn't count ?

It seems you are trying to provoke me in calling you an even bigger fool than I previously thought. However I won't do that and I will not share what I might be thinking. I haven't said that in the context you are trying to paint here. Go read again what I wrote, especially the part about the Patriot Act and the federal police.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
so the waco type events that occur monthly in 2005, now are in 2011 ?

Are you really such a (banable word)? Why don't you first read before you try to provoke an unintelligent debate? I am not going to share that lower level with you. I never said they would start in 2011. The WACO-type events have already grown past the monthly stage as discussed before. And as this "civil war" will grow in its intensity, it will only be a matter of time before groups will organize in manoeuvre and armed conflict. But it will most definitely be happening around 2011 as Titor said that around that time outright open fighting will be common.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
"so the american civil war of 2005 as prdicted by jt" really is "a few isolated taser incidents of 2005 as predicted by JT "?

Didn't John Titor say that they would start on a monthly base? So, yes they started out as a "few isolated cases" but now they are already growing worse.

Originally posted by syrinx high priestk
1 last simple question. If 1/1/06 rolls around, and there is no civil war going on in the US, which excuse will you use to hang on to the myth ?

1) the altered timeline excuse. it happened is his timeline, but not ours
2) the multi-universe excuse.
3) the type-o excuse

A simple question asked by a simple soul. John Titor never made any excuses my friend:

John Titor
”perhaps its more interesting to consider what I won't be doing to try and stop that war.”

“Find 5 people within 100 miles that you trust with your life and stay in contact with them.”

”Get a copy of the US Constitution and read it.”

"Some things that are quite different on one worldline have very little effect as time passes and the worldlines appear to "converge" again and look very similar. Worldline changes are not exponential; they act more like chaotic attractors with varying effect depending on their size and location."

TimeTravel_0 : I just wish things didn’t have to happen they way they will.
Yareisa : we cannot change it?
TimeTravel_0 : Its too late.

"As far as I can tell right now, you are headed toward the same events I would call "my history" in 2036."

Now, that doesn't really sound like someone who is looking for an "out" or “excuses” does it? It sounds more like someone who is pretty convinced we are heading for the same events he already experienced.

[edit on 28-7-2005 by Roth Joint]

I just have to repost my signature because it's apparently not showing up...

"All debunkers PWND by Roth Joint, end of story! "

-Chris

hey roth,
can you kindly answer the question ? I wasn't asking titor. What will your excuse be when 1/1/06 gets here and there is no civil war in the US ?

a,b or c

cause I'm gonna be here 1/1/06, and I can't wait to remind you or your answer.

from the official website, (where you can purchase merchandise or the book)

"On my worldline, life is not easy. We live in a world recovering from years of war, poison, destruction and hate. All of it, courtesy of the thinking and actions of people that live right now in the same world you do, worrying about which stocks to buy or whether or not a stranger is lying to them on the Internet. "

preach john preach ! allelujah !


"Perhaps I should let you all in on a little secret. No one likes you in the future. This time period is looked at as being full of lazy, self-centered, civically ignorant sheep. Perhaps you should be less concerned about me and more concerned about that."

maybe he should have imagined killing 6 billion people, then he wouldn't have to deal with us loathsome creatures


"Were biological or chemical weapons used in the war? Were any weapons used that effected people's minds?
Yes there were biological and chemical weapons used. No mind control weapons but there are new "non-lethal" weapon systems that turn out to be quite lethal."

yeah, this makes me think of tasers. thats a dead ringer


"Is it still safe to fish in 2036?
Yes, we can fish. There are some areas that are still too dangerous to
spend a lot of time in so we can't fish in those areas."


yeah, no nuclear winter after 3 billion people get wiped out. guess he never heard of "half-life"

I only wish someone asked him about the nuclear winter, how long the sun was blocked out and the impact on the ecosystem

dang

"The Arab countries appear to have weapons of mass destruction. Do they use them against America?
Not against America but they are used against each other."

u-huh- sure. syria nukes iran, but not us or isreal. hey, it could happen

Didn't he say something about this being the last space shuttle? I could have swore I read it somewhere in his posts.

John Titor
"The President or "leader" in 2005 I believe tried desperately to be the next Lincoln and hold the country together but many of their policies drove a larger wedge into the Bill of Rights."

www.washingtonpost.com...

GOP Allies Say Bush Is Close to Court Pick
Choice May Be Announced This Week

July 18, 2005

"This country is really divided right now on the war," she said. "The president, as the leader, should, I think, have an overwhelming feeling to appoint someone that the Senate can agree on to keep the country together, fighting these battles."

www.theconservativevoice.com...
Property Rights: Bush breaks promise to nominate a Thomas or Scala

July 22, 2005

After an initial review of his record, the America First Party has deep concerns regarding the nomination of Judge John G. Roberts, Jr. to the US Supreme Court. Judge Roberts' record on property rights contradicts the President's repeated campaign promise to nominate judges in the mold of Justices Scalia and Thomas.

Mr. Charles continued, "One area where Judge Roberts' disregard for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is evident is the protection of property rights. Judge Roberts has repeatedly defended expanded state authority over private property and court ordered confiscation of income and property. This is not a man in the mold of Justices Scalia or Thomas."

Q:" has a real scientist ever commented on titors story ?"
A: you betcha.

credit to razimus .com
(really cool time travel site)

razimus.com...

Dr. Michio Kaku, a leading theoretical quantum physicist in the world and co-founder of String Theory. Dr. Michio Kaku graduated from Harvard in 1968, summa cum laude (highest honors), and number one in his physics class. He went on to the Berkeley Radiation Laboratory at the University of California in 1972, and in 1973 Dr. Kaku held a lectureship at Princeton University.

"I think the person you mentioned is a fake. Mini black holes do not have the power to bend time, and CERN certainly has not produced any. The LHC will be turned on in 2 years, and there is a small chance it might create a mini black hole, but these are sub-atomic in size and energy. Time travel may be possible, but not for a Type 0 civilization. Type III civilizations, however, may have access to the Planck energy, where this possibility opens up. "




now remember, titor claims there was a nuclear war in 2015, yet in 2036 they have time travel technology.



you might ask yourself, what the heck is a type III civilization ?
Type III civilizations can control the energy of a galaxy. They can extract the energy from stars and black holes. They are capable of manipulating Planck energy. This is the energy that exists at the center of black holes, where space-time is unstable. Controlling Planck energy could result in the control of worm holes leading to instantaneous travel across the universe. It is unknown what limits this type of civilization would have, they may have access to inter-dimensional travel. They may even be able to time travel.


but they need spare parts for their O/S !!!!!!



you may ask yourself, how long would it take for us to get to a type III civilization without nuking everything like in titors story ? 100,000 to 1,000,000 years.

lets be nice, its friday. Lets say it only takes 1,000 years, not 1,000,000.

After a nuclear war on 3 continenets that kills 3 billion people, that 1,000 years still puts us at 3005.


but hey, some guy posted pictures on the internet, it must be true

where are these pictures, and i read back a bit...someone said he took a picture of christ, and some things from the future...are any of these pictures on the internet?

[edit on 29-7-2005 by BirDMan_X]

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
Q:" has a real scientist ever commented on titors story ?"
A: you betcha.

Why don't we take a look at what Michio Kaku actually meant to make clear:

"Then there is the problem of stability. The Kerr black hole, for
example, may be unstable if one falls through it. Similarly, quantum
effects may build up and destroy the wormhole before you enter it.

Unfortunately, our mathematics is not powerful enough to answer
the question of stability because you need "a theory of everything"
which combines both quantum forces and gravity. At present,
superstring theory is the leading candidate for such a theory (in fact, it is
the ONLY candidate; it really has no rivals at all). But superstring
theory, which happens to be my specialty, is still to difficult to
solve completely. The theory is well-defined, but no one on earth is
smart enough to solve it.

Hasn't Titor confirmed that in 2036 one has made progress into solving "superstring theory" to the extend that time travel is possible? Thus so far I don't see anything incongruous with what Michio Kaku is saying.

John Titor
Who doesn't love string theory? Please forgive the next few comments, I'm trying to be cryptic and jump starting my memory at the same time. In 2036, string theory still dominates physics due to its continued "effect" of encompassing other physical properties from unrelated fields.

A great deal of the theoretical mathematics behind time travel was discovered by testing various ideas in string theory and eliminating the anomalies. As I recall, it was this original work that led to the final proof that six dimensions do indeed curl up to give us our observable universe.

This in turn supported more of the theoretical math behind time travel.
It's ironic that the beauty of string theory gives future engineers the confidence to create the distortion unit even though the final proof is still unknown. You're a physics student, have you ever heard the Princeton String Quartet play?


Now lets see what other respected scientists have to say about the possibility of time travel:

www.mkaku.org...
Because of the enormous amount of work done by theoretical physicists
within the last 5 years or so, Hawking has since changed his mind,
and now believes that time travel is possible (although not
necessarily practical).

english.pravda.ru...
Moscow State University professor Dmitry Goltsov has recently
announced about the sensational possibility to travel in time.
Cosmologists discovered a new dimension that prejudiced Einstein's
theory of relativity. The three-dimensional model is not actual
anymore.

www.advance.uconn.edu...
Professor Ronald Mallett has B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in physics
at Penn State and, in 1975, embarked upon a distinguished career at
UConn. His field of specialization has been theoretical general
relativity and relativistic quantum mechanics.

Mallet: According to quantum theory, practically an infinite number
of possibilities exist simultaneously. If you traveled through time,
you could encounter yourself in any of the alternative scenarios, but
you could not alter the flow of your own space-time continuum. It's
physically impossible.

Mallett knows about these things, because he's a physicist. He also
firmly believes time travel is possible. Sometime next year, in fact,
he hopes to produce the first piece of technology that eventually
will allow him to build a time machine. It will be a device that
employs lasers to actually twist space. And he plans to build it
right here, at the University of Connecticut.

www.pbs.org...
Carl Sagan, the astronomer, Pulitzer Prize-winning author, and
legendary popularizer of science, gave this interview during the
making of "Time Travel."

Sagan: One of Hawking's arguments in the conjecture is that we are
not awash in thousands of time travelers from the future, and
therefore time travel is impossible. This argument I find very
dubious, and it reminds me very much of the argument that there
cannot be intelligences elsewhere in space, because otherwise the
Earth would be awash in aliens. I can think half a dozen ways in
which we could not be awash in time travelers, and still time travel
is possible.

NOVA: Such as?
Sagan: First of all, it might be that you can build a time machine to
go into the future, but not into the past, and we don't know about it
because we haven't yet invented that time machine. Secondly, it might
be that time travel into the past is possible, but they haven't
gotten to our time yet, they're very far in the future and the
further back in time you go, the more expensive it is. Thirdly, maybe
backward time travel is possible, but only up to the moment that time
travel is invented. We haven't invented it yet, so they can't come to
us. They can come to as far back as whatever it would be, say A.D.
2300, but not further back in time.

Then there's the possibility that they're here alright, but we don't
see them. They have perfect invisibility cloaks or something. If they
have such highly developed technology, then why not? Then there's the
possibility that they're here and we do see them, but we call them
something else: UFOs or ghosts or hobgoblins or fairies or something
like that. Finally, there's the possibility that time travel is
perfectly possible, but it requires a great advance in our
technology, and human civilization will destroy itself before time
travelers invent it.

I'm sure there are other possibilities as well, but if you just think
of that range of possibilities, I don't think the fact that we're not
obviously being visited by time travelers shows that time travel is
impossible.

roth ! bravo ! you have come to the side of reason ! Thank you for illustrating my point that travelling in time first BACKWARDS to 1976, then FORWARDS to 1999, and then again to 2036 seems extremely unlikley given the arguments you were kind enough to post (too bad sagan wasn't specifically referring to titor, like maku was)


"
NOVA: Such as?
Sagan: First of all, it might be that you can build a time machine to
go into the future, but not into the past, and we don't know about it
because we haven't yet invented that time machine. ( strike 1 for JT) Secondly, it might
be that time travel into the past is possible, but they haven't
gotten to our time yet, they're very far in the future and the
further back in time you go, the more expensive it is.(strike 2,) Thirdly, maybe
backward time travel is possible, but only up to the moment that time
travel is invented. We haven't invented it yet, so they can't come to
us. They can come to as far back as whatever it would be, say A.D.
2300, but not further back in time.


strike 3, you're out !


i mean really, going backwards and then forwards, only 21 years after the nuclear war that kiled 3 billion people.

and to top it off, the trip was basically an errand to pick up a computer part, and he has time to kill before he goes back, so he hangs out of some chat boards to tell us how lazy we are.... tsk tsk...we need a stern lecture....

I'm off to research the paradox thingy, when he meets himself.....

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
roth ! bravo ! you have come to the side of reason ! Thank you for illustrating my point that travelling in time first BACKWARDS to 1976, then FORWARDS to 1999, and then again to 2036 seems extremely unlikley given the arguments you were kind enough to post (too bad sagan wasn't specifically referring to titor, like maku was)


"
NOVA: Such as?
Sagan: First of all, it might be that you can build a time machine to
go into the future, but not into the past, and we don't know about it
because we haven't yet invented that time machine. ( strike 1 for JT) Secondly, it might
be that time travel into the past is possible, but they haven't
gotten to our time yet, they're very far in the future and the
further back in time you go, the more expensive it is.(strike 2,) Thirdly, maybe
backward time travel is possible, but only up to the moment that time
travel is invented. We haven't invented it yet, so they can't come to
us. They can come to as far back as whatever it would be, say A.D.
2300, but not further back in time.


strike 3, you're out !


i mean really, going backwards and then forwards, only 21 years after the nuclear war that kiled 3 billion people.

and to top it off, the trip was basically an errand to pick up a computer part, and he has time to kill before he goes back, so he hangs out of some chat boards to tell us how lazy we are.... tsk tsk...we need a stern lecture....

I'm off to research the paradox thingy, when he meets himself.....

Carl Sagan merely was summing up some examples as to why we are not invaded yet by time travellers (in our perception) if time travel would be possible. He simply weakens that weak argument and confirms time travel is very well possible. Here are his words again (sigh):

"I can think half a dozen ways in which we could not be awash
in time travelers, and still time travel is possible.

Then there's the possibility that they're here alright, but we don't
see them. They have perfect invisibility cloaks or something. If they
have such highly developed technology, then why not?

Finally, there's the possibility that time travel is perfectly possible, but
it requires a great advance in our technology...

I'm sure there are other possibilities as well, but if you just think
of that range of possibilities, I don't think the fact that we're not
obviously being visited by time travelers shows that time travel is
impossible.

So "striker," apparently you have a severe reading comprehension problem. Either that or you just like to play dumb and dumber.

Doesn't the incomprehensible world of the Quantum Theory allow particles moving backwards as well as forwards in time and appear in all possible places at once? Ofcourse they do!

Here's an interesting article:

/57clk

Taming the multiverse

Parallel universes are no longer a figment of our imagination.
They're so real that we can reach out and touch them, and even use
them to change our world, says Marcus Chown.

FLICKING through New Scientist, you stop at this page, think "that's
interesting" and read these words. Another you thinks "what
nonsense", and moves on. Yet another lets out a cry, keels over and
dies.

Is this an insane vision? Not according to David Deutsch of the
University of Oxford. Deutsch believes that our Universe is part of
the multiverse, a domain of parallel universes that comprises
ultimate reality.

Until now, the multiverse was a hazy, ill-defined concept-little more
than a philosophical trick. But in a paper yet to be published,
Deutsch has worked out the structure of the multiverse. With it, he
claims, he has answered the last criticism of the sceptics. "For 70
years physicists have been hiding from it, but they can hide no
longer." If he's right, the multiverse is no trick. It is real. So
real that we can mould the fate of the universes and exploit them.
Why believe in something so extraordinary? Because it can explain one
of the greatest mysteries of modern science: why the world of atoms
behaves so very differently from the everyday world of trees and
tables.

The theory that describes atoms and their constituents is quantum
mechanics. It is hugely successful. It has led to computers, lasers
and nuclear reactors, and it tells us why the Sun shines and why the
ground beneath our feet is solid. But quantum theory also tells us
something very disturbing about atoms and their like: they can be in
many places at once. This isn't just a crazy theory-it has observable
consequences (see "Interfering with the multiverse").

But how is it that atoms can be in many places at once whereas big
things made out of atoms-tables, trees and pencils-apparently cannot?
Reconciling the difference between the microscopic and the
macroscopic is the central problem in quantum theory.

The many worlds interpretation is one way to do it. This idea was
proposed by Princeton graduate student Hugh Everett III in 1957.
According to many worlds, quantum theory doesn't just apply to atoms,
says Deutsch. "The world of tables is exactly the same as the world
of atoms."

But surely this means tables can be in many places at once. Right.
But nobody has ever seen such a schizophrenic table. So what gives?
The idea is that if you observe a table that is in two places at
once, there are also two versions of you-one that sees the table in
one place and one that sees it in another place.
The consequences are remarkable. A universe must exist for every
physical possibility. There are Earths where the Nazis prevailed in
the Second World War, where Marilyn Monroe married Einstein, and
where the dinosaurs survived and evolved into intelligent beings who
read New Scientist.

However, many worlds is not the only interpretation of quantum
theory. Physicists can choose between half a dozen interpretations,
all of which predict identical outcomes for all conceivable
experiments.

Deutsch dismisses them all. "Some are gibberish, like the Copenhagen
interpretation," he says-and the rest are just variations on the many
worlds theme.

For example, according to the Copenhagen interpretation, the act of
observing is crucial. Observation forces an atom to make up its mind,
and plump for being in only one place out of all the possible places
it could be. But the Copenhagen interpretation is itself open to
interpretation. What constitutes an observation? For some people,
this only requires a large-scale object such as a particle detector.
For others it means an interaction with some kind of conscious being.
Worse still, says Deutsch, is that in this type of interpretation you
have to abandon the idea of reality. Before observation, the atom
doesn't have a real position. To Deutsch, the whole thing is
mysticism-throwing up our hands and saying there are some things we
are not allowed to ask.

Some interpretations do try to give the microscopic world reality,
but they are all disguised versions of the many worlds idea, says
Deutsch. "Their proponents have fallen over backwards to talk about
the many worlds in a way that makes it appear as if they are not."
In this category, Deutsch includes David Bohm's "pilot-wave"
interpretation. Bohm's idea is that a quantum wave guides particles
along their trajectories. Then the strange shape of the pilot wave
can be used to explain all the odd quantum behaviours, such as
interference patterns. In effect, says Deutsch, Bohm's single
universe occupies one groove in an immensely complicated multi-
dimensional wave function.

"The question that pilot-wave theorists must address is: what are the
unoccupied grooves?" says Deutsch. "It is no good saying they are
merely theoretical and do not exist physically, for they continually
jostle each other and the occupied groove, affecting its trajectory.
What's really being talked about here is parallel universes. Pilot-
wave theories are parallel-universe theories in a state of chronic
denial."

Back and forth

Another disguised many worlds theory, says Deutsch, is John
Cramer's "transactional" interpretation in which information passes
backwards and forwards through time. When you measure the position of
an atom, it sends a message back to its earlier self to change its
trajectory accordingly.

But as the system gets more complicated, the number of messages
explodes. Soon, says Deutsch, it becomes vastly greater than the
number of particles in the Universe. The full quantum evolution of a
system as big as the Universe consists of an exponentially large
number of classical processes, each of which contains the information
to describe a whole universe. So Cramer's idea forces the multiverse
on you, says Deutsch.

So do other interpretations, according to Deutsch. "Quantum theory
leaves no doubt that other universes exist in exactly the same sense
that the single Universe that we see exists," he says. "This is not a
matter of interpretation. It is a logical consequence of quantum
theory."

Yet many physicists still refuse to accept the multiverse. "People
say the many worlds is simply too crazy, too wasteful, too mind-
blowing," says Deutsch. "But this is an emotional not a scientific
reaction. We have to take what nature gives us."

A much more legitimate objection is that many worlds is vague and has
no firm mathematical basis. Proponents talk of a multiverse that is
like a stack of parallel universes. The critics point out that it
cannot be that simple-quantum phenomena occur precisely because the
universes interact. "What is needed is a precise mathematical model
of the multiverse," says Deutsch. And now he's made one.

The key to Deutsch's model sounds peculiar. He treats the multiverse
as if it were a quantum computer. Quantum computers exploit the
strangeness of quantum systems-their ability to be in many states at
once-to do certain kinds of calculation at ludicrously high speed.
For example, they could quickly search huge databases that would take
an ordinary computer the lifetime of the Universe. Although the
hardware is still at a very basic stage, the theory of how quantum
computers process information is well advanced.

In 1985, Deutsch proved that such a machine can simulate any
conceivable quantum system, and that includes the Universe itself. So
to work out the basic structure of the multiverse, all you need to do
is analyse a general quantum calculation. "The set of all programs
that can be run on a quantum computer includes programs that would
simulate the multiverse," says Deutsch. "So we don't have to include
any details of stars and galaxies in the real Universe, we can just
analyse quantum computers and look at how information flows inside
them."

If information could flow freely from one part of the multiverse to
another, we'd live in a chaotic world where all possibilities would
overlap. We really would see two tables at once, and worse,
everything imaginable would be happening everywhere at the same time.

Deutsch found that, almost all the time, information flows only
within small pieces of the quantum calculation, and not in between
those pieces. These pieces, he says, are separate universes. They
feel separate and autonomous because all the information we receive
through our senses has come from within one universe. As Oxford
philosopher Michael Lockwood put it, "We cannot look sideways,
through the multiverse, any more than we can look into the future."
Sometimes universes in Deutsch's model peel apart only locally and
fleetingly, and then slap back together again. This is the cause of
quantum interference, which is at the root of everything from the two-
slit experiment to the basic structure of atoms.

Other physicists are still digesting what Deutsch has to say. Anton
Zeilinger of the University of Vienna remains unconvinced. "The
multiverse interpretation is not the only possible one, and it is not
even the simplest," he says. Zeilinger instead uses information
theory to come to very different conclusions. He thinks that quantum
theory comes from limits on the information we get out of
measurements (New Scientist, 17 February, p 26). As in the Copenhagen
interpretation, there is no reality to what goes on before the
measurement.

But Deutsch insists that his picture is more profound than
Zeilinger's. "I hope he'll come round, and realise that the many
worlds theory explains where the information in his measurements
comes from."

Why are physicists reluctant to accept many worlds? Deutsch blames
logical positivism, the idea that science should concern itself only
with objects that can be observed. In the early 20th century, some
logical positivists even denied the existence of atoms-until the
evidence became overwhelming. The evidence for the multiverse,
according to Deutsch, is equally overwhelming. "Admittedly, it's
indirect," he says. "But then, we can detect pterodactyls and quarks
only indirectly too. The evidence that other universes exist is at
least as strong as the evidence for pterodactyls or quarks."

Perhaps the sceptics will be convinced by a practical demonstration
of the multiverse. And Deutsch thinks he knows how. By building a
quantum computer, he says, we can reach out and mould the multiverse.
"One day, a quantum computer will be built which does more
simultaneous calculations than there are particles in the Universe,"
says Deutsch. "Since the Universe as we see it lacks the
computational resources to do the calculations, where are they being
done?" It can only be in other universes, he says. "Quantum computers
share information with huge numbers of versions of themselves
throughout the multiverse."

Imagine that you have a quantum PC and you set it a problem. What
happens is that a huge number of versions of your PC split off from
this Universe into their own separate, local universes, and work on
parallel strands of the problem. A split second later, the pocket
universes recombine into one, and those strands are pulled together
to provide the answer that pops up on your screen. "Quantum computers
are the first machines humans have ever built to exploit the
multiverse directly," says Deutsch.

At the moment, even the biggest quantum computers can only work their
magic on about 6 bits of information, which in Deutsch's view means
they exploit copies of themselves in 26 universes-that's just 64 of
them. Because the computational feats of such computers are puny,
people can choose to ignore the multiverse. "But something will
happen when the number of parallel calculations becomes very large,"
says Deutsch. "If the number is 64, people can shut their eyes but if
it's 1064, they will no longer be able to pretend."

What would it mean for you and me to know there are inconceivably
many yous and mes living out all possible histories? Surely, there is
no point in making any choices for the better if all possible
outcomes happen? We might as well stay in bed or commit suicide.

Deutsch does not agree. In fact, he thinks it could make real choice
possible. In classical physics, he says, there is no such thing
as "if"; the future is determined absolutely by the past. So there
can be no free will. In the multiverse, however, there are
alternatives; the quantum possibilities really happen.

Free will might have a sensible definition, Deutsch thinks, because
the alternatives don't have to occur within equally large slices of
the multiverse. "By making good choices, doing the right thing, we
thicken the stack of universes in which versions of us live
reasonable lives," he says. "When you succeed, all the copies of you
who made the same decision succeed too. What you do for the better
increases the portion of the multiverse where good things happen."

Let's hope that deciding to read this article was the right choice.

[edit on 29-7-2005 by Roth Joint]

John Titor
"I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse."

www.newsday.com...

Outrage over taser death
Family and friends of man who died after police subdued him with stun gun say he had been treated unfairly

BY MICHAEL FRAZIER
STAFF WRITER

July 29, 2005

Terrence Thomas' voice crackled through the tiny speaker on his girlfriend's cell phone yesterday, an ordinary message from a man who had no idea he was in the last hours of his life.

"I might be a little late," Thomas, 35, of Hempstead said about 11:30 p.m. Tuesday night. Five hours later, he was dead after being stunned with a Taser gun while in custody at a Queens station house. The cause of death has not been determined.

"He was my all and he had a good heart," said Maricha Purdie, 36, mother of Thomas' three children.

Purdie and other relatives gathered yesterday at the Hempstead home of Thomas' mother, Dorothy, where they listened to the recording on Purdie's cell phone.

After listening to the recording twice, Thomas said she was angry that officers shocked her son with 50,000 volts to subdue him, saying: "They are going to pay for what they did to my son." She said the family has hired an attorney.

Thomas, who was sweaty and trembling, was stunned Wednesday with the Taser after paramedics and officers were unable to remove him from his 105th Precinct cell.

When the Emergency Services Unit "gets in the cell, he's still fighting," a police official said. "He's still fighting after they Taser him and wrap him [with restrictive netting]. When he's in the ambulance, he's refusing to let them put the oxygen mask on."

He died at 4:20 a.m. at Queens Hospital Center in Jamaica.

The city medical examiner said yesterday the results of the autopsy won't be complete for another week. Police said there were no signs of trauma and a substance taken from Thomas' stomach is being tested.

Authorities said Thomas' cellmate told police Thomas said he'd swallowed narcotics. The prisoner said he later awoke to find Thomas convulsing and called for help.

Police officials say officers followed proper procedure in handling Thomas.

Thomas and his friend Laqwan Jones, 28, were arrested during a traffic stop after police learned the 2005 Chevy rental they were riding in was reported stolen July 13 from upstate Newburgh. Officers also found an alcoholic beverage container and a plastic bag in the car.

Shortly after Thomas was placed in a cell, he appeared sick. Thomas refused treatment, police said, and "was combative." Four officers entered the cell about 3:20 a.m. Wednesday and used the Taser to subdue him.

"They [hospital officials] told me he expired," Dorothy Thomas said. "He was my baby."

In Queens Criminal Court in Kew Gardens yesterday, Jones was being held on $20,000 bail after being arraigned on charges of drug possession and criminal possession of stolen property.

"Why would he steal a car when I gave him my car?" said Jones' mother, Kathy Studgon of Laurelton.

Thomas' relatives said he was treated unfairly because he has a criminal record.

Thomas' record in Nassau County dates to 1985 with drugs, robbery and weapons-related charges, according to police. He served 4 years in prison for robbery and misuse of a weapon.

But relatives say Thomas had changed. He cared for his two daughters, ages 13 and 15, and a son, 5, at the home he shared with Purdie in Hempstead.

He was a garbage collector for the Rockville Centre Sanitation Department and a groundskeeper for the village's housing authority, relatives said.

Shortly after Thomas left the message for Purdie, she returned the call. He told her he was in Brooklyn and would be late picking her up from work in Merrick, so she got another ride.

The next call was from police telling her he was dead. "He was my other half," she said.

Staff writers Daryl Kahn and Herbert Lowe contributed to this story.

hmmmmmmm its been pointed out I have a simple mind. My simple mind has a question......

titor claims he met himself as a young lad. That can't be true on one level, and I doubt its true on another. This is the same universe, same time, same place. He is literally in 2 spots at once. I don't need to even go to the granfather paradox.

First, I doubt that can be true because it would mean your SOUL exists in 2 places at once. I'm no theologian, but I think that would be problamatic. How can a soul be transported through time ? How can it be split in 2 ?

Secondly, I'm sure its impossible due to a very simple physics theory.

Matter cannot be created or detroyed, only converted into different states. If There are 2 titors in the same place at the same time, matter has been created out of nothing. That simpy can't be.


I'm not very smart, but the folks at UPENN are;
dept.physics.upenn.edu...

Conservation of Mass
Usually attributed to Lavoisier (in 1789). "Matter (mass) is neither created nor destroyed". In other words, in a closed system (nothing escapes), any process will not change the total "matter content" (i.e. mass) of the system.



but titor can travel BACKWARD then FORWARD in time, in a corvette, on a parts errand, 21 years after a nuclear holocaust, meet himself, chat on the internet.......









ok roth, please show me where I siad time travel was impossible. I posted "extremely unlikley"

please try to understand I am specifically referring to "The american civil war as described by John Titor"

I brought a quote from a real scientist who was REFRERING SPECIFICALLY TO JOHN TITOR

kindly stay on topic.


your very elusive, but I'll give you a few more chances.

[edit on 29-7-2005 by syrinx high priest]

[edit on 29-7-2005 by syrinx high priest]

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
hmmmmmmm its been pointed out I have a simple mind. My simple mind has a question......

titor claims he met himself as a young lad. That can't be true on one level, and I doubt its true on another. This is the same universe, same time, same place. He is literally in 2 spots at once. I don't need to even go to the granfather paradox.

First, I doubt that can be true because it would mean your SOUL exists in 2 places at once. I'm no theologian, but I think that would be problamatic. How can a soul be transported through time ? How can it be split in 2 ?

Secondly, I'm sure its impossible due to a very simple physics theory.

Matter cannot be created or detroyed, only converted into different states. If There are 2 titors in the same place at the same time, matter has been created out of nothing. That simpy can't be.

I don’t see why 2 Titor’s in the same place would create any conflict.

According to the many worlds theory an abundance of different worldlines exist in the same matter containing “multiverse” or “super universe.” Therefore, if one Titor on a specific worldline decides to travel to his alternate self on another worldine it would not be a creation of matter from nothing. It merely would be existing matter shifting to another place within the same parameters.

John Titor
I do agree that the "grandfather paradox" is not possible simply because the classic problem is presented as an observer's issue magnified to a universal issue. Your statements about observation are correct when you isolate the experiences to a single worldline.

However, the reason there are no paradoxes is because the universe doesn't care how we react to its handy-work. In a Universe made up of infinite worldliness (super universe), everything is possible and has a 100% probability, therefore…no paradoxes.

The grandfather paradox is impossible. In fact, all paradox is impossible. The Everett-Wheeler-Graham or multiple world theory is correct. All possible quantum states, events, possibilities and outcomes are real, eventual and occurring. The chances of everything happening someplace at sometime in the superverse is 100%. (For all you scientists out there, if Schrödinger's cat had a time machine, he might not be in the box at all.)

Therefore, there is a worldline where you are alive and another where you have gone back in time to kill your relative.

If you would meet your “clone” which one do you think would have your soul?

John Titor
"I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse."
"...there are a great many "non lethal" weapon systems in development that turn out to be quite lethal."
"They usually start out with, "In the future, the army and police will fight its enemies with new weapons systems…" When they use the word "enemy", they're talking about YOU!"

www.suntimes.com...

Taser killed man, pathologist finds

July 29, 2005

BY FRANK MAIN Crime Reporter Advertisement

In the first ruling of its kind in the nation, the Cook County medical examiner's office has determined the Feb. 10 death of Ronald Hasse was caused by a Taser stun gun a Chicago Police sergeant used to subdue the doped-up 54-year-old man.

Hasse received a five-second electrical burst from the Taser, followed by a 57-second charge, according to Dr. Scott Denton, a deputy medical examiner.

"That's extraordinary," Denton said Thursday. "He became unresponsive and died after this."

The primary cause of Hasse's death was electrocution from the use of the Taser, Denton said. A contributing cause was methamphetamine intoxication, he said.

An autopsy found Hasse's system contained .55 micrograms of methamphetamine per milliliter of blood -- .05 micrograms above what is considered a lethal level. But the illegal drug probably would not have killed Hasse without his getting "pushed over the edge" by the Taser's jolts, Denton said.

Hasse's death was ruled a homicide, which the medical examiner's office defines as death at the hands of another person. The term does not imply a criminal act occurred. "This was an inadvertent killing," Denton said.

There is something i want everyone to consider.

Think about it. When the Cops used to kill "black people" in the cities. They would shoot them and sometimes the "black person" wouldn't even have a gun. In these cases the cops would plant a gun on the person and also plant CRACK coc aine on their person.

The Meth found in/on these people could be part of the cover up. They could do that you know.

The argument being made by most Titorist disbelievers is the fact that Johntitor.com exist and that someone is making money behind all of this.

Does this necessarily mean that John Titor was a hoax? Of course not.

It merely means that someone, somewhere is trying to capitalize on this phenomenon. Knowing that they will never have to worry about copyright infringements and other legal problems.

And they are using this to their advantage. If someone were to come out and say, 'Ok, that's enough. I'm the 'John Titor'. You're making money off my work, now give it back.'

That would mean two things for the webmaster of JohnTitor.com.
1.) He's solved the question of whether or not John Titor is a hoax.
2.) (which feeds on the first) Ok, so if you claim you are John Titor. Prove it.

Now for this person who claims he is John Titor, he is even faced with a bigger dilemma. Proving that it was a hoax. Which, in my eyes is far greater than proving that someone was a time traveler from an alternate universe.

Of course that scenario only works if we assume that John Titor was a hoax. Not what if he is real? What would that mean for the webmaster of JohnTitor.com?

Well it would mean that:
1.) He will never be sued by John Titor (as it will be impossible for Titor to return to this timeline ever again)
2.) The webmaster is just an attention whore. He's so behrept of creativity that he's using a timetravelers documents to make money.

In either case, I believe the webmaster of JohnTitor.com is a scumbag.

I believe this to be true because he's completely mucked the waters of the attempt to discern whether John Titor is real or not. He's messed it up for everyone.

Now we have to task of trying to filter between what is sh.. and shinola.

Ok here are the materials that surfaced after John Titor 'left' this timeline earlier in the millennium.

1.) A John Titor Book
2.) Someone claiming to be John Titor's 'boss' informing the internet community that he 'died'.
3.) Rantings from a woman in Florida claiming that she is a family member of John Titor.
4.) Someone claimed they met John Titor and saw his 'ID card'

Ok, let me go through these four as quickly as possible.

1.) We obviously know that John Titor could not have written an autobiography of himself in the short time he was here. We can attribute this to the scumbag webmaster of JohnTitor.com. Once again, this is just an attempt to make money off of someone else’s intellectual property. Therefore, this can be completely thrown out of the window and never show its face on Amazon.com ever again.

2.) This message occurred sometime last year. In short, someone posted on the Time Traveler Forums that they personally knew John Titor and they he had died on...whatever date it was (can someone dig this up for me?).

Ok, this one is a little easier to break apart. First off, It would be nearly impossible for two people from one timeline (Post-apocalyptic 2036) to arrive on the same timeline at different points in the timeline.

We also know that this person trying to pull one over us because he admitted that he did not know John Titor in the future and was just trying to end the entire John Titor phenomena (Much like Mr. Scumbag-Webmaster-of-JohnTitor.com will eventually do).

3.) Ok, I'm not going to spend too much time with this one because it's still developing. However I will say this...

In John Titor's initial post, he does not give away any personal information (aside from the fact that he's from Florida). That would mean that if this lady is true to her word, John Titor must have traveled to his mother's house and contacted her personally.

This is a valid claim, I mean...if one were to go back in time for a brief period, this is very tempting for anyone. However, why make such a big fuss about it? And why now?

4.) Silly People. Some guy claimed that he met John Titor waiting in the line at Taco Bell. They conversed and eventually John Titor showed the guy his ID card with the name 'John Titor' inscribed on it.

Ok this is simple.
- John Titor is not his real name. This is an alias he uses in order to protect his family.
- With as much preaching as John Titor does for a healthy lifestyle, for him to eat at Taco Bell would be like...Andrew Dice Clay making a mini series for 'Lifetime Television'. It's just not going to happen.

With that aside, hopefully we can discuss John Titor more efficiently.

And for the record nothing posted on this thread has disproven John Titor. They have all been theories. A gallery of 'What if's'

However, evidence supporting John Titor's claims have been provided by Roth Joint and others within this thread a multitude of times.

Which leads me to believe that the repeated validation of John Titor's claims suggest that John Titor was...well, true to his word.

ok...how old was John when he came to are time and what year did u come and tell us all these things. I am new to this forum and really dont feel like reading 42 pages to find these answers in this topic. Now if he new what happend in 2005 he probly was living now and a younger version of John Titor is living in are time right as I type this message...I think i read somewhere he lived in Michigan? Couldnt we see if there actually is a John Titor livng today and if there is, maby he is the same guy jst older from the year 2036.

Maby im wrong and u guys have talked bout this but jst seems like if someone had a Michigan phone book or somtin lol we could find him, though he'd have no idea what we were talkin bout.

Originally posted by BirDMan_X
I am new to this forum and really dont feel like reading 42 pages to find these answers in this topic.

Then why bother to even comment on a thread that you havent read?

Originally posted by BirDMan_X
Couldnt we see if there actually is a John Titor livng today and if there is, maby he is the same guy jst older from the year 2036.

This question has been asked so by people repeatedly. If you would just bother to read two post above yours, you would have answered this question.

John Titor is not his real name. It's an alias.

Also, John Titor lives in Florida, not Michigan.