It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


you've probably seen this but

page: 16
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 03:59 PM
In August-September 2003, the ATS Forums were ratcheted up a few notches, leaving some to wonder whether the admin/staff were truly ready.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 04:02 PM
Hi PamelaM,

Thanks for sharing and welcome to ATS. That is a very interesting coincidence. Did you explicitly ask him to comment on your dream? It would seem that he would've speculated on this at some point without any prodding.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 04:08 PM
Oh yes, for any newcomers, MaskedAvatar offered his research assistance and traveled to 1969. His immediate feedback was garbled at best, but he has since regained some composure.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 04:11 PM
I asked him what he thought but he ignored it.
He also ignored me when I asked him if I knew him.

I felt as if I knew him when I first met him .There was some kind of bond between us I didnt understand.
I cared for the safety of a man I have never even met.
I cared for him like he was one of my best friends. or like he was one of my brothers.

You know how it is sometimes when you meet someone for the first time and you feel like you knew them forever?
Times that times ten.
The inside of me felt close to him when I first met him.
I know it sounds silly and strange but I couldnt understand it.

I tested him as well. I sent him a bunch of questions to answer and told him I knew how he would answer them.
I wrote my answers down on a seperate piece of paper and then he sent them back. They matched.
I told him see? I know you very well!

know what he said?

"I didn't know I was so predictable."

that was it.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 04:17 PM
Not only composure, kukla, but you will immediately observe my keen and critical eye with respect to time travel.

Three weeks ago, Timelord William the Skeptic Overlord placed me in a position of temporary temporal discombobulation, the sequence of which can be observed in my work of pirated title A Brief History Of Time, here:

I record that the same warp is observable now in the space-time continuum, and while Overlord William will no doubt return with a similar technical hitch explanation, the plot has thickened as to how this has been able to occur twice, and also there would need to be some attempt to correlate this with the activities of WITD Mark II for the purposes of investigative dismissal.

However, due to the limited observational powers of the proletariat, this will have been noticed so far only by the few.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 04:29 PM

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Not only composure, kukla, but you will immediately observe my keen and critical eye with respect to time travel.

I record that the same warp is observable now in the space-time continuum, and while Overlord William will no doubt return with a similar technical hitch explanation, the plot has thickened as to how this has been able to occur twice, and also there would need to be some attempt to correlate this with the activities of WITD Mark II for the purposes of investigative dismissal.

Little confused. Do you mean you see date/time stamp manipulation/anomolies on this thread?

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 04:32 PM
I haven't seen any of those, kukla, but you should be able to observe when you post that you are posting possibly 10 minutes ahead of time today, a phenomenological observation first made by me in the Hawkingesque pronouncement of that other thread you have already visited four minutes from now.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 04:34 PM

I too have met people online that I quickly identify with and can see where you're coming from. I still find it strange he didn't speculate on this in any more detail.

What is your opinion of Pickover and RGB?

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 06:21 PM
PamelaM - "... then he sent them back. They matched.
I told him see? I know you very well! "

Would it be a problem to scan his reply and post it? I am trying to collect images realated to JTs story.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 11:01 PM
At this time I do not have a scanner hooked up.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 11:09 PM
Pamela and Darby,

I noticed a John Titor lurking today over on your board. You get many impostors coming over?

[Edited on 7-9-2003 by kukla]

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 11:10 PM
That's not a problem. I'm perfectly happy to have it xeroxed and mailed to me. I could scan it. You can u2u me if this is okay with you.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 11:40 PM
Its in an email. There is really nothing to scan.
Its just words.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 11:41 PM
Actually we have only had a couple people dare to post as John. Its all been recently.

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 11:55 PM
I encourage all those that have been following this thread with either active or passive interest, offer any services you might have for the John Titor project. Help ktprktpr, he's going to need it.
For those of you that have already offered your services, thank you.

posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 01:17 AM

Of course, with the publication of the Nature article, its the hypodermic effect all over agian. You have to admit that JT's ghost writer got awfully lucky with that article's timing. It propagated far and wide, in both websites and publications. I would also remind everyone that submitted articles in academic journals can easily take a year to be approved. *hint*

Precisely. If one is an "outsider" they can easily be surprised by a prediction followed by an article in a legit research journal. But an "insider" knows that the article has gone from submission through refereeing, Q&A possible editing and then publication. That can easily take a year. And that final year may actually be two to five years after a research discovery is made.

In the mean time, if one has inside sources or simply has a better clue than the average bear about where to look for obscure information about in progress research they can make a "prediction" and have it confirmed ala shooting fish in a rain barrel.

If, for instance, a micro-BH was made in a large hadron accelerator it would likely take several years before the discovery was confirmed and the articles were published. The half-life of a sub-atomic particle mass BH would be in the micro-second range. It would take a long time to confirm the finding.

posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 02:05 AM

Thanks for welcoming me.

Correct. Boomer talked about stable micro-BH's and overcoming Hawking Radiation problems. Though that might be true it's not likely. Hawking was making some very broad statements about the very nature of the universe and cosmology themselves in his thesis concerning Hawking Radiation. He wasn't simply talking about black holes.

Boomer also talked about the Kerr ring singularity nature of his BH's.

Kerr proposed a solution for a spinning BH where the singularity forms a ring. One can theoretically enter the BH from the pole, drive through the ring and exit "somewhere else." But Boomer has a few problems to overcome:

First, he needs a very large diameter ring. The ring has to be large enough for the vehicle to fall through without being subjected to the tidal effects. The vehicle is not a sphere so the ring has to be very large. But he has a very insignificant mass. He said that the total mass of the gadget was only 200-220 kg. At best he could manage a micrometer sized ring.

Remember that the mass of the Earth will form a BH with a Schwarzschild radius of

posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 02:28 AM
amn GOOD WORK on the physics!!!

FINALLY somebody who has done their HOMEWORK posts!!!!


posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 06:12 AM

Thanks for the thumbs up.

I've been following this saga since shortly after Titor first appeared. I see in your profile that you're a writer. Outstanding!

Boomer, I have to admit, was a very crafty writer in his own right. He did a very good job of putting together a cogent sci-fi story set in a political background. It's unfortunate that his physics wasn't up to the same standards as the politics.

There are other problems with his story. His "gadget" is interesting. The cutaway drawing of the C204 shows a vacuum tube based device.

If you copy the photo and blow it up with WinXP Viewer you'll see several vacuum tubes, large capacitors and coils. It looks like several LC -vacuum tube circuits.

posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 02:02 PM
Welcome Pamela and Darby. As you know, I've been posting a bit over at anomalies. I've also been in contact with Dr. Brown. As much as I wanted to believe JT's story, the opinions and observations of Dr. Brown are of much value. He's made some very good points, some of which Darby has already pointed out. He's told me that it is indeed an impossible scenario, without some new breakthrough physics. Some have said that Dr. Brown is just too closed minded, but from his replies, I don't think he is at all closed minded to the idea. He merely uses his knowledge of physics and quantum mechanics to come to a very educated decision. He's a brilliant man, IMO. He's thought about this and other TT theories in depth. His comments are very interesting...

Having now read his postings in some detail he is definitely:

a) A Heinlein fan.

b) A physics groupie, maybe even a real physicist although I doubt it. As in physics classes definitely, physics major possibly, I doubt a Ph.D.

c) NOT a real computer geek. Going back to get an IBM 5100 "because it can read old IBM languages"? To deal with the "Unix year 2038 problem"? And at the same time, uh, "computers have made tremendous strides" and "people now are amazingly tolerant of bad/unreliable hardware". Finally, his info-life isn't even a creatively enhanced version of what we have now -- it IS what we have now. The web. His GPS even works (hey, show me pictures of your GPS that works -- THAT would be interesting, as would a car from the future or ANY future techno toy:-). I on the other hand fully expect there to be MAJOR information processing revolutions -- full paradigm shifts -- between now and the 2030's, and expect quite a lot of the most interesting ones to concern the development of global electronic culture.

And no no no, there is no way anybody could POSSIBLY care enough about "old IBM languages" for which the 5100 is a presumed portable bridge to send somebody back with a very expensive toy at high risk to retrieve one. I mean, what critical program or information could POSSIBLY exist at that time? Programs -- give me something to program -- anything to program -- and I'll cut programs that supercede the entire code base accessible to pre-1975 computers in six months. Programming is goddamn easy, and the world abounds in good programmers and truly superior programming environments NOW. By 2036, if they've done nothing else they will have created five or sixfold improved programming environments, possibly integrated with at least rudimentary AI.

Lessee, following Moore's Law and being VERY CONSERVATIVE with full TWO YEAR doubling time, we expect 16 doublings in constant-cost power between now and then. That is, an el cheapo personal computer of 2036 ought to be roughly 64000 times more powerful than an el cheapo PC today, just as today's are amazingly some twenty or thirty thousand times more powerful than that good old IBM 5100. With a laptop running at the power equivalency of a few hundred TERAHertz, with local disk storage capable of holding a few petabytes of data (that would be 10^15 bytes), with network capacity to the household reasonably expected to be easily into the gigabyte per second range if not the terabyte per second range, the guy describes "the web" of that time as if it is more or less the same as it is now. No automated realtime videoconferencing. No voice activated, high bandwidth wireless connected PDA's with far more compute, storage, and network capacity than a system currently sitting directly on the T3 cloud. No mention of megalibraries, collation of world-data, AI at all. Bo-ring. Wrong. This guy may be from the future, but not MY future. In my future, war or not, nobody will give a rodent's furry behind about antique IBM code "readable only by an IBM 5100".

What, people suddenly became very, very stupid and couldn't write a decompiler or disassembler for a system that had a literal handful of machine instructions (mind you, I >>learned

<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in