John Titor said "The Next President tries to be the next Lincoln" Is there any doubt Civil War is

Originally posted by Luciferdescending

So somehow time travel is as easy as navigating the many existing branches of a tree? You need to get that to market ASAP. Apparently this is the simple answer we have all been waiting for. Unless you go by Titor's rules and everytime you move off your branch, you create a new branch no matter what you do so there is no way to back track, EVER.

There it is AGAIN. "no way to backtrack EVER". The only logical conclusion to that statement is that all the other worldlines must cease to exist, else backtracking would not be an impossibility.

nenothtu out

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Luciferdescending

So somehow time travel is as easy as navigating the many existing branches of a tree? You need to get that to market ASAP. Apparently this is the simple answer we have all been waiting for. Unless you go by Titor's rules and everytime you move off your branch, you create a new branch no matter what you do so there is no way to back track, EVER.

There it is AGAIN. "no way to backtrack EVER". The only logical conclusion to that statement is that all the other worldlines must cease to exist, else backtracking would not be an impossibility.

nenothtu out

Really? So when you go through a one way door, the place you just left ceases to exist? When you go down a one way street does the street behind you cease to exist? How about if you fell in a hole so deep that you were stuck there until you died. NO WAY BACK OUT EVER. Would the rest of the world cease to exist?

I honestly do not understand how you get that conclusion. Just because he cannot go back does not mean back has to no longer exist, it just means he cannot get back there. The reason he cannot get back is because, according to Titor, the very act of making the trip creates a NEW WORLDLINE. How are you still missing this and the yet claim to be smart enough to believe Titor?

Originally posted by TheColdDragon



This is an informative and simple explanation of String Theory, and touches on MWT. String Theory is the most prominent field in current Theoretical Physics.

Paradox does not exist in MWT.

OK, amusing has officially become sad. What is the title of the thread you are posting on?

reply to post by Luciferdescending


Where do you get the notion of "one way" from?

nenothtu out

ATTENTION!

This thread has drifted off-topic. The title of the thread is John Titor said "The Next President tries to be the next Lincoln" Is there any doubt Civil War is... BEFORE you post a reply, read the opening post again!

From this point onwards any posts that cause thread-drift will be removed without further discussion or warning.

The same goes for personal attacks and uncivilized behaviour.

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by Luciferdescending

 

Where do you get the notion of "one way" from?

nenothtu out

I have tried, I really have. If you want to have that discussion, please start a thread. This is about John Titor being correct in predicting a president will compare himself to Lincoln. John Titor told a poorly constructed fairy tale about traveling back in time and some people believe that Obama being one of yet another president to compare himself to Lincoln is proof that Titor was telling the truth. I offer that not only is that poor logic but the man has already proven himself a hoax. I would be glad to come to your new thread and answer your questions about 'one way' though.

The possibility of the mentioned 2% divergence actually referring to a 4 year difference resulting from the lack of a Y2K crash has a lot of promise as a supporting theory for Titor's story.

I have mentioned on other threads relating to Titor that people don't often take into consideration how much of an effect HAVING the internet in the intervening years that Titor did not have it (In his claimed reality, most computers stopped working in 2001 and it caused a big mess).

I wonder how much influence the internet had on China getting the Olympics, I wonder how much influence the internet had in quelling dissent by giving teens and young adults an entire universe of data to distract themselves with. Without the internet... would we have complacently allowed the last eight years to happen? It is an excellent question.

I don't think most skeptics are taking this tidbit into account, because I think that the bast majority of the errors in Titor's story may be caused by a delay in the unrest that occurred in his original timeline due to the internet.

How I see it is that there are some fixed objects in time, events that have a high percentage of inevitability in a relation to key events occurring prior to them. At a certain point, these fixed events take on a critical mass and become unavoidable. It is possible the war Titor talked about is as unavoidable as he says, because too many events feeding into it had already occurred... perhaps we have just delayed the inevitable.

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
The possibility of the mentioned 2% divergence actually referring to a 4 year difference resulting from the lack of a Y2K crash has a lot of promise as a supporting theory for Titor's story.

No it does not. The math has already been worked out for you by another clever poster. Aside from that, I already showed you how 2% is the craziest number in the world for that.

I have mentioned on other threads relating to Titor that people don't often take into consideration how much of an effect HAVING the internet in the intervening years that Titor did not have it (In his claimed reality, most computers stopped working in 2001 and it caused a big mess).

I wonder how much influence the internet had on China getting the Olympics, I wonder how much influence the internet had in quelling dissent by giving teens and young adults an entire universe of data to distract themselves with. Without the internet... would we have complacently allowed the last eight years to happen? It is an excellent question.

So you think that Y2K and the resulting years without computers is and would only lead to a difference of 2% yet you go on to tell us how grand a change it would be? Interesting logic.

I don't think most skeptics are taking this tidbit into account, because I think that the bast majority of the errors in Titor's story may be caused by a delay in the unrest that occurred in his original timeline due to the internet.

Errors caused by a delay? What kind of delay causes you to contradict yourself 3 times?

How I see it is that there are some fixed objects in time, events that have a high percentage of inevitability in a relation to key events occurring prior to them. At a certain point, these fixed events take on a critical mass and become unavoidable. It is possible the war Titor talked about is as unavoidable as he says, because too many events feeding into it had already occurred... perhaps we have just delayed the inevitable.

So, if that war does not come in the next year, the next decade, the next 50 years, will you ever give up on this hoax or will you continue to make excuses that Titor himself never came up with?

reply to post by Luciferdescending


2% doesn't mean a 2% difference in the time things occur, it refers to a overall 2% difference in everything that exists. A pot is blue, not red. Someone hit a baseball rather than missed. Small perturbations in the similarities of realities.

Or, the percentages may be representative of a factor of events that occurred in Titor's origin which are held up in comparison to whatever world line is visited. "JFK Assassinated" could represent 1% or 5%.

When discussing statistics, it is important to note that direct math isn't always the necessary function of percentages, as the percentages are representative of a given value which may be arbitrary.

Likewise, "100%" may not be completely similar. People may have a mole on the left side rather than a right, it still allows for minutiae of difference between realities.... just unimportant differences.

Of course the percentage model Titor used may also directly refer to recognizable differences, and as such, would be subjective rather than objective in scope.

Originally posted by ho chi minh
you think that the president of 2009 being an african-american would be a milestone in history,so why did'nt this Titor character call it.

that's obvious

titor is white.

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
reply to post by Luciferdescending

 

2% doesn't mean a 2% difference in the time things occur, it refers to a overall 2% difference in everything that exists. A pot is blue, not red. Someone hit a baseball rather than missed. Small perturbations in the similarities of realities.

Or, the percentages may be representative of a factor of events that occurred in Titor's origin which are held up in comparison to whatever world line is visited. "JFK Assassinated" could represent 1% or 5%.

When discussing statistics, it is important to note that direct math isn't always the necessary function of percentages, as the percentages are representative of a given value which may be arbitrary.

Likewise, "100%" may not be completely similar. People may have a mole on the left side rather than a right, it still allows for minutiae of difference between realities.... just unimportant differences.

Of course the percentage model Titor used may also directly refer to recognizable differences, and as such, would be subjective rather than objective in scope.

This is like pulling roots. Ok, lets say the only difference between this world and the next is a car traveling down the main road by my house 10 seconds later than in the other world. That is pretty small wouldn't you say? On one world a deer crosses the road, in another it sees the car and turns back. In one it continues on to the forrest, in the other it cuts back through yards where it passes my sister's house. My nephew who woke up to pee sees it out the window and get's excited. He wakes my sister who is grumpy anyway but you better not wake her. She is now grouchy and looking to fight. She starts one with her older son and it escalates out of hand and he gets shipped off to live in another state. Now 31 years out, do you still claim just 2% or less difference or do you think that each and every differing second from that point on will lead to infinitely more changes between the two world lines?

The point is that Titor was purposely vague on that. He has no idea what that means or how you could or would even quantify it. I love your spirit and all but all you are doing is guessing at different ways that what the guy said might make sense if, you know, you just change what it meant. It just does not work that way.

reply to post by Luciferdescending


No, I am answering the questions you asked by providing possibilities as to what the Titor person might have intended... and attempting to present the possibilities that are most likely.

You keep stating at people that they are trying to "CHANGE" what Titor said. Since Titor isn't handy, discussions of what the man said require examination and interpretation and debate. Since there isn't anyone to yae or nay it, it is speculation.

I am entitled to speculate, since the thread itself is a speculation...

though I will again reiterate that the first thing I thought of when I noticed the lincolnification of Obama over a few days was Titor. There wasn't any second or third thought, only Titor and what he had said.

And I've been through election cycles... I haven't personally seen another president cluster a bunch of lincolnesque comparisons one after the other about themselves, even in an election year.

Lincoln is inevitably brought up in any election year by the talking heads, and those comparisons are made (As well as the stupid question of if this person is like Lincoln).

This is the first time I've seen a President actively encourage the comparison through actions.

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
reply to post by Luciferdescending

 

No, I am answering the questions you asked by providing possibilities as to what the Titor person might have intended... and attempting to present the possibilities that are most likely.

No, you are trying to fill in the gaps that Titor purposely left in his story because it was not true so he could only tell so many lies. You are guessing at what he meant to make it true when there is only one way to make Titor's story true and that is to take OUT things he himself stated.

You keep stating at people that they are trying to "CHANGE" what Titor said. Since Titor isn't handy, discussions of what the man said require examination and interpretation and debate. Since there isn't anyone to yae or nay it, it is speculation.

Why speculate over words that are written down. He said enough to make it clear he was lying. He said enough to understand he was making it all up. Anything you need to interpret should be a clue as to the authenticity anyway, shouldn't it?

I am entitled to speculate, since the thread itself is a speculation...

though I will again reiterate that the first thing I thought of when I noticed the lincolnification of Obama over a few days was Titor. There wasn't any second or third thought, only Titor and what he had said.

And I've been through election cycles... I haven't personally seen another president cluster a bunch of lincolnesque comparisons one after the other about themselves, even in an election year.

Lincoln is inevitably brought up in any election year by the talking heads, and those comparisons are made (As well as the stupid question of if this person is like Lincoln).

This is the first time I've seen a President actively encourage the comparison through actions.

So let me see if I get this. We all know that Lincoln comes up every election in the context of "will he be like Lincoln?" This is your claim, is it not? So someone else knows this common knowledge and predicts that someday a president will use that idea and present himself as "yes I am the next Lincoln" is any more from the future than you or I because??????

reply to post by TheColdDragon


Could your explanation/understanding of Titor's divergence percentage be any more convoluted? You appear to be somewhat confused by Johns ambiguities!

No matter how you slice or dice it, your explanations do not account for the vast amount of things that haven't come to light, including the fact that America now has it's first African American president. I would imagine this to be far more important/significant than him having an interest in Abe albeit 4 years later than Titor stated.

IRM

[edit on 23/1/09 by InfaRedMan]

jt could not predict our future. he said that himself. the jt story shouldn't even be in prediction and prophecies it's more of a skunk works thread anyway. but he mentioned the lincoln thing and i remember he didn't like to give to much detail so i would mark this down as interesting.

Originally posted by Luciferdescending
No, you are trying to fill in the gaps that Titor purposely left in his story because it was not true so he could only tell so many lies. You are guessing at what he meant to make it true when there is only one way to make Titor's story true and that is to take OUT things he himself stated.

You asked a question I am answering. You again state quite clearly that Titor is a liar. This is your OPINION and is not substantiated. Your arguments to the effect are specious at best.

Why speculate over words that are written down. He said enough to make it clear he was lying. He said enough to understand he was making it all up. Anything you need to interpret should be a clue as to the authenticity anyway, shouldn't it?

What exactly did he say that made it "CLEAR" he was lying? You have stated he contradicted himself. Cite the sources, and remember, we are discussing the possibility of a four year divergence, so if you use the argument "He said this and it didn't happen in the year he said it would", you are diverging from the topic at hand.

So let me see if I get this. We all know that Lincoln comes up every election in the context of "will he be like Lincoln?" This is your claim, is it not? So someone else knows this common knowledge and predicts that someday a president will use that idea and present himself as "yes I am the next Lincoln" is any more from the future than you or I because??????

You have used several arguments that "Anyone could have predicted this" as proof against Titor's story. This is not proof, and it is a specious argument. Yes, anyone could have said it. It's when people are right that it matters.

Here is the problem with people who disbelieve in time travel or prophecy; when a prophet or someone claiming to know the future is RIGHT, the argument abused is that anyone could have known if they knew the information to look for. No credit is given.

When they are WRONG, it is that they are obvious hoaxes.

So really, if there was someone who truly knew the future, NONE of you disbelievers would give credit either way... which means your arguments are specious in the sense that you are not logically giving credit to accurate predictions, but attributing it to "Cheating" by knowing the information...

I don't think there is anything anyone could say about the future that you or IR man would not condemn as "Obscure but obvious" after the fact.

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage

 

Really?

It is possible Pamela may not have received an email and I am mis-remembering it.

It is also possible that you are lying and my memory is accurate.

This is the way your mind works. "I do not remember stuff that I am not as educated about as the rest of you so I will toss out words like Liar."

You do not get anything I am saying and so far have added nothing about Titor to this thread. You have come close in mentioning you knew some stuff once but now you don't and others must be lying because you do not remember what they say. Why would I bother answering your questions here. Go start your MWT thread and I will be glad to come there and just let you trounce me. I will not sit here and just let you say whatever falls into your head while insinuating everyone that does not agree is a liar. You are either making stuff up or tossing out insults to win a case you have not even made. Stop. If you have relevant Titor related things to discuss, perhaps we can get back there but you have already called enough people names they do not deserve for my tastes.

[edit on 23-1-2009 by Luciferdescending]

Originally posted by JPhish

Originally posted by ho chi minh
you think that the president of 2009 being an african-american would be a milestone in history,so why did'nt this Titor character call it.

that's obvious

titor is white.

Titor says that color/race/religion don't really matter all that much in his time. If that is the case, he wouldn't even think to mention it.

It would be like saying "oh, you will have a president who will be 6' 2". It just wouldn't occur to him (assuming he were actually a time traveler) to mention the color of a president.

The Lincoln reference would HAVE to refer to GWB, there is no other way to interpret it.

Originally posted by TheColdDragon

So really, if there was someone who truly knew the future, NONE of you disbelievers would give credit either way... which means your arguments are specious in the sense that you are not logically giving credit to accurate predictions, but attributing it to "Cheating" by knowing the information...

Can you please clarify? Are you referring to Titor when you talk of giving credit to accurate predictions? Can you define accuracy? I'd imagine that anything that is 4 years late, still ambiguous and open to interpretation is less than accurate. In fact, it's close to irrelevant! If you had a watch that lost 5 minutes a day, my bet is that you'd throw it away or ask for your money back!

Personally, after Titor gave highly technical descriptions into the workings of his 'time machine', do you think he would somehow forget to mention something as important as a 4 year divergence? He certainly didn't fail to mention the importance of a divergence percentage. However, one clearly does not equate to the other!

As we all know, it's easy to fudge figures & facts when we start talking of percentages. Ask any statistician!

Many within this thread have been talking of these variable divergence percentages (2% ---> 5%) and at the same time, have been suggesting that you can apply this new fangled 4 year rule to many of the things Titor said. Here's the thing... If you apply the 4 year rule to many of Titors 'predictions' we are now talking about a 'constant' and not a variable percentage. Titor never alluded to any such thing did he?

You really can't have it both ways! I know Titor is dear to you but people can't keep making up new rules in-game to change the scoreline. Not only is it a sign of desperation but it's bad sportsmanship.

IRM

[edit on 24/1/09 by InfaRedMan]