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.


[HOAX]Is my Grandfather a time traveler or a joker?[HOAX]

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 10:17 AM
I briefly scanned the comments in this thread, but didn't see it mentioned...

Those staples have held up remarkably well in relation to the rest of the document, no?

Also, as was mentioned, the "burns" are highly inconsistent, and basically have no explanation...

A valiant attempt, but a complete waste of time...

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 10:29 AM
I have the OP with interest and the constructive comments following. In this, I don't have much to add excepting that this "document" is a fake. Even disregarding the physical evidence of the front page diagram and the use of a "Courier" font greater than 10 point (unusual in the extreme), the grammar and spelling is invariably poor.

This appears to be a manual for travellers, having been transported "back" to our time and abandoned. Clearly, the "mission" failure statement at the end and the "singed edges" would imply that an attempt to destroy the document was made.

Quite apart from all of these matters, it does have some interesting concepts. I am particularly intrigued that the author has grasped the fundamentals of parallel universes, also the immediacy of effect concerning various lifeforms (the bacteria and Brutus comments).

Somebody awarded a B+ for effort, I would go further and submit an "A" for content - I feel that it was let down particularly by the "dual memory" concept which is in negation of the concept of only partial leakage between bodies in parallel universes. I might be wrong though, have only seen Uncle Rico's time travelling machine rather than having used it :-)

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 10:37 AM
I submit the OPs original photo post for evidence of a Hoax:

Notice the bottom of the page where the pages meet with an uneven burning. I believe this points to a collection of individually altered pages. If you put a page of paper in the oven with heat it will burn form the outside in. If the burning happened to the book while it was assembled the burnt edges would match more closely on adjacent pages. Each page appears to have its particular burnt margin with no relation to the pages before and after.

edit: Upon further reflection there does seem to be some similarities along the page edges. Glaring differences could be explained by the chipping of charred paper. Some of the paper appears to have had the burnt edges worn down, while other pages have a larger margin of burnt edge. Perhaps the OP can post pictures that show the whole closed book from the top, side, bottom, back, etc. allowing us to get a better view. The pictures submitted in the OP had much of the page edges left out.

[edit on 8/15/08 by stikkinikki]

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 10:41 AM
the whole burnt page look is one way people think how old documents might look.
it really screams "made up". the document looks very fresh and then purposefully destroyed.

"yellowing" happens only with time as the paper tends to oxidize. unless it's an acid free paper stock stored in a ph balanced box, it's gonna yellow.

interesting story though.
a lot of giant bodies of text. one page full of run on sentences, and no paragraphs.

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 10:47 AM
This type of burn pattern can be produced by take, say, 10 or so loose sheets that are still placed together and then placing them on top of logs in a fire grate that are burning at both ends.

The pages detached and each "skew" a few degrees greater than the last sheet. If you take a look at the bottom of the pages in that last photo, you will see that the pages would align if unstapled and placed together to match the same pattern, thus producing the "skew" effect of the original pages.

This is not to say that the burning is valid, simply that it is possible to reproduce these burns with a *loose-leaf* group of 10 pages or so. In any event, if the intent was to burn the whole document, it must have been rescued after only a minute or so after resting on a cool yellow fire. Anything hotter and the pages would have combusted as I'm sure any open-fire enthusiasts would agree.

The lack of damage on the last sheet is not necessarily indicative of anything other than a lack of flame or hot embers in the centre of the fire. I think that this charring could be reproduce on a simple "camp-fire" that had not been built properly and so was burning from the edges in rather than the centre out.

... or the simple option of a hand-held lighter feathered to the paper edges.

It is also conceivable that these pages were burned as part of a larger stack without any attempt to separate into individual pages. Under these circumstances, only the hottest fire would have an effect and then only over a notable period of time. Try burning a ream of paper as a stack and you'll know what I mean.

I digress, the matter of the physical document is just whimsy, the content is still evidential of clear thought and not consistent with the presentation.

[edit on 15-8-2008 by SugarCube]

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:02 AM
In addition to what everyone else has suggested, I find the writing styles of the op and the book to be similar. It's interesting that the op uses the word 'mundane' to describe his grandfathers death, given it also appears on one of the pages in the book. Co-incidence or hoax
fun nevertheless.

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:02 AM
I call HOAX for the following reason:

The word Mundane was used in the few pages over three times. Also, the word was also used by the original poster to describe his grandfather's death. I find this to be a clue that both texts were written by same individual.

I could be wrong and he has the manual for time travel as well.


posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:04 AM
I just had a thought concerning the grammar and spelling... This in no way endorses the authenticity of the document but *could* explain the odd English. This resembles some documents I have seen that have been translated from another language to English by a non-native speaker of English.

As an example, this reads as if a German had translated from original German to English but their English was not up to scratch. This could explain the use of some of the adjectives (e.g. "lovely").

Just a thought...

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:10 AM
seems a bit far fetched, and there are a few things (already mentioned) that point to a fake.

good read tho.

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:13 AM
I have to say kudos to the OP. Your backstory could use some work, but the documents are the work of a highly creative and intelligent mind.

When I was reading them, I could picture it as part of some larger novel - the Time traveler getting ready to go back in time, reading the manual, etc. Maybe some of the pages interspersed throughout the book. I do so love a good sci-fi story and this would be a great premise

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:14 AM
The orig. John Titor? Perhaps not, but in the same respect I do find this less credible based on spelling and context. - John was right, as is more evident every day; even if his story is more debated. This entry is just an amusing read. .

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:21 AM
Look how much our language has changed over the past 100 years, do you guys really think it will be the same as it is now one hundred plus years into the future from which this document allegedly originated?

[edit on 15-8-2008 by Mikeraphone]

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:30 AM
well, i noticed the fresh black, modern font too... totally looks like it was printed from a computer, and the edges look freshly burned - nice and crisp, to make it look aged. and also, the drawing of the UFO can't be true, because a man is pictured sitting in the center; most likely a gravity generator of some sort, like an electromagnetic gyroscope, is housed in the center of most UFO's. if you've seen Otis T. Carr's crafts, then you know that his 45-foot saucer can hold 3 people around the center comfortably.

Otis T. Carr's flying machine

i'm pretty sure the original post is fake...

[edit on 15-8-2008 by adrenochrome]

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:32 AM
I feel sorry for people who actually believe any of this. You can be talked into anything.

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:38 AM
I agree, the syntax,language used, adjective subsitutes are similar to that of a translated text. Try translating a foreign text into english using a simple online translator, notice the similarities in language use?

Has anyone thought that if this document is from a traveller from the future then whatever language is used is not a valid form to substantiate anyones decision whether it is real or fake. Think of it as if we in 2008 created a time machine, we travel to the times of Victorian or Edwardian maybe later and some numb nuts leaves "the manual" behind. What would this era of people think about the language used? Dismiss it because it is poorly written? Just because the content of this document does not perfectly resemble our modern language does not mean that it is not genuine. Who knows how we shall speak in the future, do we sound like William Shakespeare?

I agree that the condition of the "manual" is something that maybe discourages people from believing. It is something of interest, the uneven burn marks, inconsistencies etc.

With regards to people talking about how "fresh" the staples, lettering are, if this is indeed from a time traveller who is to say that this person has not travelled through time and the document is not that much older than people seem to think.

Very interesting none the less. If not genuine then an A should be rewarded for grasping some far fetched and extremely in depth content.

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:56 AM
To much, it screams fake due to the strange choice of information in the manual. It starts out by telling that this manuan is about how we got here - How come some important things in history is just briefly mentioned, while other, more science fiction-ish details are being spilled out?

It screams a good read, and I believe that is exactly what it is, and nothing more.

It is well done though, the front page is definately not computer-altered as far as I can see.

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 12:13 PM
It is easier to think it's a lie than rather believe a possible truth....

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 12:34 PM
WOW this is alot to respond to. Ok, I'll do my best.

Burn Effects

Yep, I agree this shows it may just be an old man's joke. It was the first thing I noticed and made me question if this was real. I'm not saying fire bu tit just looks fake. I thought burn because there was some peices of charchoal in the chest


They look relatively new and untouched, signifying they were added in later or are just somehow very well preserved.

About gramps

I'm not even sure he would be the respective time traveler to this manual.

he fought in WW2, and married in the 50s. So if he was the time traveler, he must have came here in the 1930ish area.

He loved jokes, so I figured this may be one of them.

One thing, however, is that he told good bed time stories when I was young. So this means he either could make up a good story, or that they were so good that they were really memories of an old man's past.

and his death was mundane because, well, he was in his 90s. It's pretty normal to die at that age.

Condition of the book

I scanned all pages, and what you see is what you get. There seemed to be no binding as you'd find on a book. Just papers stapled three times along the left side. There is no double sided print, as someone asked. One side is printed, the other not. And, the whole thing smells like marshmallows.
Guess that's why it was burned?

If this is a manual, the first pages are odd. Why would they do some history crap I have no idea.

Take note that I noticed a very light text didn't scan properly. Right under the "T55t" is a light text that reads "Page numbers do not exist in order to help in preventing temporal distortions if captured". You may be able to faintly see it, but it's very hard to.

As to the history section again, I think this calls out false. I don't see a war going on that can be called a world war. But according to some conspiracies, there is research into anti-gravity, so maybe that's what it mentioned.

The real question to prove it's validity, and the reason I posted it, was the science. Does it make sense or is it just incorrect?

[edit on 15-8-2008 by Tegmondy]

[edit on 15-8-2008 by Tegmondy]

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 12:37 PM
"Ahh, the unmistakable handwriting of a ten year old Watson. I think we have a clue! Contact Scotland Yard immidiately!"

Jk....... I'm sure you're at least 12.

[edit on 15-8-2008 by Xeros]

posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 12:39 PM
maybe the government is so pathetic that a 12 year old can win into office 100 years from now.

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in