posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 12:36 PM
Okay, here is the logical fallacy:
1. John Titor said that he was sent back in time to collect a machine, the IBM 5100, which he would bring back to his own superiors, so that they
might use it to avert y2k38.
2. As you and Titor claim, his presence in this "worldline" has altered the future, and this was known to him before he even set out.
3. Titor, now on our worldline, and not his origin 'line, would be returning to a future on this, our new, 'line.
4. There would, therefore, be no point in sending him back in time, because the item he was meant to collect could never be returned to those who
5. John Titor, even if he were a time traveler, would not logically have been sent back in time for this reason.
6. Since he has not been sent back in time for the stated reason, there is no conceivable reason for him to have been sent back in time that would be
so central and important to devote the resources necessary to develop a time machine to send him back in the first place.
Now, you might claim that he could somehow navigate the 'lines such that he would return to his own, but this also means that he would have to
navigate across an infinite number of such 'lines. He also, in going back, would have to pinpoint the particular 'line that would lead him to the
IBM 5100, as there would be an infinite number of histories, the vast majority (if I may use a term that does not quite fit with the concept of
infinity) of which would not even have such historic outcomes.
I at first was quite open minded to the idea of a time-traveler. I speculated on numerous things that might prove him right: disputes over the 2004
election, protests to the 2008 Olympics, et cetera. But, unfortunately, I simply cannot accept an unfalsifiable claim, with its own built-in
explanation for why his predictions fail.