It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Did Future Humans Go Back in Time and Eat All of the Dinosaurs?

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Thought this was an interesting discussion and technically it could probably happen somehow. Also thought it was interesting that I stumbled upon a story that might have something to do with this. So I started my own thread before I made the connection in my mind to this one. Here's the link:
Crashed UFO Claimed From Dinosaur Age




posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 09:25 PM
link   
yes of course, but the story was written in a simpler more innocent time. And of course that information was not necessary to the plot line.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by yourrolemodel
 


Of course! Why go back to the age of the dinosaurs on foot when you can go in your own sports model UFO. You might as well have a cool ride while your there.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 09:50 PM
link   
This idea was actually the basis of a cartoon strip in the comic 2000AD published in the UK in the 1980s. The story centred around cowboys travelling back in time to hunt dinosaurs to feed an ever expanding human population.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:00 AM
link   
i was trying so hard to just enjoy this thread for its lightheartedness. Unfortunately i feel overwhelmed by the fact that no one bothered to argue that quantum physics and infinite universes still can contain a fixed amount of energy and there paradoxes of eating the same dino over and over again would violate that rule in every way. i mean come on, people argue about all kinds of crap here for no reason and noone went there? just sayin



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by re22666
 


If there are infinite universes then there are plenty of universes to be harvested from, without some violation of fixed energy, because, its obviously infinite



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   
MMm, I had dinosaur last night. Tasted like stringy meat.

YABADABADOO!!


[edit on 7/13/2008 by FadeToBlack]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by re22666
 


a fixed amount of energy. I had not read that and it would definitely have to be explained to me as it doesn't sound right. Wouldn't quantum theory imply that there would always be random particles popping in and out of existence indefinitely, hence zero point energy? Please correct me if I'm wrong.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by TubbsMcGee
 


Tubbs, I agree with you. Obviously a person of reason. I appreciate your posts. by the way....not a one line post.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 08:24 PM
link   
I don't buy the whole multiverse Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, If every decison splits into the formation of a new universe, where does the energy and matter come from every time an entire new universe is instantiated? This view is itself the largest violation of the conservation of energy.

The whole conservation of energy concept is local and scale dependant law anyway. The universe should have wound down like a cheap watch by now otherwise.

Just imagine all those poor tired little atoms and electrons, spinning slower and slower as they bump into each other and vibrate away their will to exist. The universe becoming a tepid pool of waste heat.

Nope, I don't see that at all. I see everywhere amazing enthusiasm and outpouring of energy.

Why can you store energy in a battery, or bring a bunch of batteries with you, but you think you cannot bring the seperate energy of the same beast at different times to a new juncture of time and space? Have you instantiated a new matter/energy?
No!

You have only borrowed it from one time / place and moved it to another. Why can you in your opinion move an object in the physical dimension, or the time dimension repeatedly. But not uniquely move it from the combination repeatedly?

This view suggests that we are less things, and more the foci of energy events. If we move the focused pattern, the pattern prior to the point we moved it still existed, still exists in it's time until that point.

In time space we have not created something new, we have seperated one instantiation the second of which continues, and the first terminates.
Which is to say the instantiation was never time dependant, only time based.

Lucy, I think you got some splainin to do!



[edit on 13-7-2008 by Cyberbian]

[edit on 13-7-2008 by Cyberbian]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Cyberbian
 

so I can't exist in two timelines at the same time? Is that what you're trying to say? They sure talk purty on your planet. Wish I had a 'your language to my language' translator.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by TubbsMcGee
reply to post by re22666
 


If there are infinite universes then there are plenty of universes to be harvested from, without some violation of fixed energy, because, its obviously infinite


but then they could not repeatedly harvest the same one a moment before the previous harvest. that is what i was talking about, this theory of repeatedly harvestng the same beast. in an infinite amount of universes, they would be jumping from universe to universe, stealing from it, that is quite different. but before this gets argumentative, ill just concede.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by MsSmartypants
reply to post by re22666
 


a fixed amount of energy. I had not read that and it would definitely have to be explained to me as it doesn't sound right. Wouldn't quantum theory imply that there would always be random particles popping in and out of existence indefinitely, hence zero point energy? Please correct me if I'm wrong.


see, now you are all getting into the science of it and thats great and valid and wonderful. i was simply addressing the simple hypethisis that you could repeatedly go back in time to take the same animal before it died. that did not ever really get into any theories of quantum anything. just people going back over and over and getting the same one. that was what was said, so that was what i was asking about. multiverses = getting a new one each time and that makes sense just fine.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 11:26 PM
link   
it is amazing. an idea was posited a few times and i asked a question in reference to IT. then people jumped to show off how much they know about other things. I thought maybe if i asked a question, id get an answer. instead i got people explaining why it would work under other circumstances. thats great. thats not what i asked. i just said, if you can go back in time and harvest the same animal over and over - as was stated....how would that be possible. sorry i did not include this....... unless there were multiple universes, in which case you would not be harvesting the same one, negating my reference to the statement, making the question null for it is based on something that no longer exsists. better?



posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by re22666
 


I believe if one went back in the past and changed something (of course someone appearing from the future would be a change in its self) the present they came from wouldn't be changed, simply a new path to a different present would be formed. So yes it's a different dinosaur every time.



posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 11:50 PM
link   
if i ever get ahold of a time machine i am going to go back in time and eat all the neanderthals.

or at least as many as i can before i accidentally eat my own ancestor and wink out of existence.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by The Parallelogram
 


Get with the program. The trick to it is to go back and eat the same Neanderthal over and over. Just pick a nice juicy one to start out with.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join