For all those expierencing "time line" shifts.

Originally posted by Whalin Rift
reply to post by Incendia vox

 

There is a difference between constructive criticism and rudeness.

There is also no proof that you have a brain in your head.

Yes there is, the mere fact that I am writing this should prove that.
(even non biological Computational centres capable of producing original creative writing pieces such as this one are brains)

"No it isn't and I explained why." Please forgive me for not noticing your brilliance

No worries.

If you havnt noticed there is no proof for many things in this world. But according to you if there is no proof it doesnt exist.

No,
It hasn't been proven to exist if no proof has been found of it's existence != No proof means it dosen't exist.

Have you debunked every other thread too? You better get started, you have a lot of threads to debunk.

No, I haven't. And you're right, I do.

And if you havnt noticed this is an ATS board where much of what is discussed there is no proof of, so why are you even here?

This website gave me the impression that I would be denying ignorance.

Who the hell are you to be rude and tell ANYONE to shut up on an ATS message board. This is the place for discussion.

Who the hell are you to be rude and tell ANYONE to stop being sceptical on an ATS message board. This is the place for scepticism.

If you dont agree with this thread, dont read it or respond to it unless you have something constructive to say.

Sometimes the only constructive thing you can do is something destructive: I.E. saying the LHC is not responsible for alterations of the (or a) timeline. Removing this argument would lead to further discussion on possible solutions to the problem in question and would remove sensless discussion about wild unfounded claims such as black holes converge realites and LHCs in other universes make matter spontaneously turn in black holes just because they're travelling at 99.9% of the speed of light.

Also this thread is about describing differences in the timeline, not why is the timeline changing.

Sorry for trying to introduce some basic science!

Addendum: Should really be called Mutiple/Infinite Universe Hypothesis, theories require evidence.

[edit on 16-2-2010 by Incendia vox]

So nobody ever responded to my post? Nobody ever thought about false memory implants for reality control?

reply to post by Incendia vox


You are wrong. Theories require a lack of evidence against them.

The great theories that became basis of fact weren't because there was undeniable proof of their existence in the beginning, it was because there was nothing to prove them wrong.

The theory of gravity only became the Law of Gravity after sufficient debunking took place and none were unable to denounce the profound claims of Newton.

However, do remember that they are called theories for a reason. The word theory implies that it isn't 100% undeniable fact and is in fact still open for interpretation. To even use the term theory implies that it could be wrong and it is, in all reality a guess.

Therefore, I could make the THEORIZE that that there are a bunch of balloons in the center of the Earth and until someone physical proves me wrong or right it will be a theory. It might not be a tangible or well followed theory, but it is a theory nonetheless, and just because some people are against it does not prove anything.

The greatest theories of time have been ridiculed and denounced time and time again until proof was finally presented, but proof of such things takes a long time and goes hand in hand with the advancement of the species. There is plenty of evidence to support multiple dimensions however, with current technology there is no way to PROVE it.

Originally posted by Incendia vox
There is a difference between constructive criticism and rudeness.

Indeed, and being able to show and respect dignity is significant where neither constructive criticism nor rudeness is needed.

There is also no proof that you have a brain in your head.

Yes there is, the mere fact that I am writing this should prove that.

(even non biological Computational centres capable of producing original creative writing pieces such as this one are brains)

It hasn't been proven that the brain isn't anything but an optical device.

For as I know, you are just a computer program because you haven't proved you are alive.

Need a bit of dignity?

No, It hasn't been proven to exist if no proof has been found of it's existence != No proof means it dosen't exist.

Therefore, in accordance to your dignified logic, you are not alive until proven.

This website gave me the impression that I would be denying ignorance.

I just denied ignorance that you are alive.

This is the place for scepticism.

Review T&C Decorum & Manners.

Also this thread is about describing differences in the timeline, not why is the timeline changing. Sorry for trying to introduce some basic science!

Basic science is knowledge and includes conscience as an anomaly, it is neither skeptical nor mutually exclusive.

Science can't prove the conscience exists, yet does basic science deny it exists. No.

Why do so many scientist conspire against science itself?

serenity - well, I am slightly less susceptible to meme-indoctrination and suggestion than the average. So I would be far more likely to be the one not in the programmed/meme-acceptance group than the other way around.

[edit on 2010/2/16 by Aeons]

reply to post by davesidious

please expand on your explanation. Simply stating that something is or is not is quite deceiving.

however, to further explain where my view of this idea comes from.....

from wikipedia
"Trans-world identity:

A metaphysical issue that crops up in multiverse schema that posit infinite identical copies of any given universe is that of the notion that there can be identical objects in different possible worlds. According to the counterpart theory of David Lewis, the objects should be regarded as similar rather than identical."

from Surrounding Dimensions As "Onion" Layers
In 1974 Dr. Robert Gibbons wrote an intuitive thought-piece welcomed by his friend Gene Roddenberry—the producer of "Star Trek"--as theoretical support for the "warp drive" previously imagined by series writers as allowing the spaceship Enterprise to travel faster than light. The paper theorized existence of super-space—beyond a swarm of sub-spaces that comprise interpenetrating dimensions of physical reality—including our own familiar "universe."

funny thing....... Super-Space is an accepted theory

Of course the Star Trek reference is admittedly silly at best, however Dr. Michio kaku has given some validity to the theories expressed within the sci-fi community.

From S U P E R S P A C E by Paul Davies
In the domain of the quantum the apparently concrete world of experience dissolves away among the melee of subatomic transmutations. Chaos lies at the heart of matter; random changes, restrained only by probabilistic laws, endow the fabric of the universe with a roulette-like quality.

So, I speculate that rather than profess that the unknown is impossible (since any good scientist knows that NOTHING is the only impossibility), It is rather improbable. Therefore as the Universe/Multiverse is as far as we know infinite, there are more than likely an infinite number of calculations of probability occurring at any one point allowing for the possibility of improbable events at almost any given time.

[edit on 16-2-2010 by pyrael]

Originally posted by dreamseeker
I am assuming time line shifts occur very suddenly. This just happened to me recently a neighbor's dog had been barking,whining crying all day since 7 am. I talked to my neighbor and she said the dog had been crying all night as well. She also said that the elderly neighbor always leaves his house but has not for days. She said last night his dog was whimpering and crying. She said she thinks that the nieghbor is hurt or dead. I call 911 and they tell me to call maintence so they can enter the apartment if need be.
The dog was barking more and more. The police show up and asks where the guy lives; what happened etc.I saidsomething about a dog barking they said there is no dog.
The police go upstairs and everything changes so suddenly. There is no dog when the man had a dog for a long time. The lady denies ever speaking to me. She said she just arrived home but she came to my door. The man is ok but suddenly he lives on a different floor and different apartment with no dog?
How does a guy go from being hurt/dead to being alive without a dog living on a different floor? I have talked to this guy a few times and I know he has a dog lives on the thrid floor.
I saw the lady later on and she didnot even recognize me. The 911 call now came from someone else and had no mention of a dog barking? Then the lady who supposedly called 911 was not even home?
Is this just really bad police work or some sort of time shift?
The lady who I talked to mentioned a weird smell coming from the guy's apartment.
When I called maintence back they said a call was never placed. I explained the situation to the same guy I spoke with but he never spoke with me?

Ok that right there is a shroedinger's cat....well in this case dog/person with a dog...wierd event, nobody wanted the man to be dead, so reality was changed,probably by a overwhelming consensus that the man was fine and there was no dog. Research shroedinger's cat...cool stuff!!!!

Originally posted by dzonatas

Originally posted by Incendia vox
Therefore, in accordance to your dignified logic, you are not alive until proven.

According to my logic, I can be alive but not be not proven to be alive.

Science can't prove the conscience exists, yet does basic science deny it exists. No.

Why do so many scientist conspire against science itself?

What did this have to do with anything?

also, regarding theory and fact
upload.wikimedia.org...
see: does the evidence support the idea.

More on topic than the rest of this: I could have been sure that proxima centauri was 4.3 light years away instead of 4.2. Blame my bad memory.

[edit on 16-2-2010 by Incendia vox]

Originally posted by Aeons
serenity - well, I am slightly less susceptible to meme-indoctrination and suggestion than the average. So I would be far more likely to be the one not in the programmed/meme-acceptance group than the other way around.

[edit on 2010/2/16 by Aeons]

Exactly, we are outside of the people that have been programmed, we remember things the way it really was, I am basing this on shroedingers cat, that the program was for people to view certain events making reality the way most but not all of us percieved an event,however us,
we were'nt convinced, you understand now?

[edit on 16-2-2010 by ldyserenity]

I do not think that people have been "programmed."

Psychological scotoma would lead people to reject that which does not fit with their preconceptions. Conformism would allow people to conform to the group rather than be the odd-man-out.

I reject whole heartedly the concept of programming.

People can be suggested to accept meme-metaphors that seem sensible to to them. That means that they first must be simple and easy to understand. They must be metaphors. And they must have some sort of internal sense that jives with enough of what already exists in their world view to not be ignored.

It is not programming. It is human nature to reject that which does not fit with what you already know to be true.

Food for thought: Ok, I am new to this site. What if the differences are because time has changed to a more rapid pace? Just a thought…. Maybe the movement you notice or the discrepancies you notice are due to time moving faster. Like when you flip through a series of the same picture quickly, you are more likely to notice small discrepancies. And why would groups of people come forward about timeline issues if there was nothing to notice? I think it is legitimate to think that a change is being observed. The question is, what is the change? What we see is always skewed with perception based on experience. Are your timelines messed up or is time moving faster?

Originally posted by Incendia vox
According to my logic, I can be alive but not be not proven to be alive.

If you think you are alive, now prove you won't experience infinite death.

Somehow, if you are alive now, you haven't experience infinite death.

If infinite death didn't exists, then wouldn't there be only ordinary time?

If infinite death did exist, would we all be dead by now?

While you work on that, we have time.

Originally posted by Aeons
I do not think that people have been "programmed."

Psychological scotoma would lead people to reject that which does not fit with their preconceptions. Conformism would allow people to conform to the group rather than be the odd-man-out.

I reject whole heartedly the concept of programming.

Do you think the concept of terraformed planets is possible?

If so, do you think that include the needed phase to program people to make sure the terraformed process completes before they are given complete freedom?

reply to post by gwydionblack


Very little of what you said in this is true. The only part in it which is true is that theories could be wrong. What distinguishes a theory from a hypothesis is what you said transformed theories into laws.

Originally posted by dzonatas

Originally posted by Aeons
I do not think that people have been "programmed."

Psychological scotoma would lead people to reject that which does not fit with their preconceptions. Conformism would allow people to conform to the group rather than be the odd-man-out.

I reject whole heartedly the concept of programming.

Do you think the concept of terraformed planets is possible?

If so, do you think that include the needed phase to program people to make sure the terraformed process completes before they are given complete freedom?

Freedom isn't given. It is a natural state that can be abridged.

You can lead horses to water, and you can even teach horses where the water is....but its upt to the horse to drink it.

[edit on 2010/2/16 by Aeons]

Originally posted by dzonatas

Originally posted by Incendia vox
According to my logic, I can be alive but not be not proven to be alive.

If you think you are alive, now prove you won't experience infinite death.

Somehow, if you are alive now, you haven't experience infinite death.

If infinite death didn't exists, then wouldn't there be only ordinary time?

If infinite death did exist, would we all be dead by now?

While you work on that, we have time.

I tied looking up 'infinite death', all I could find was this: www.lyricsmania.com... What is infinite death? I have never heard of the term.

Originally posted by Aeons
Freedom isn't given. It is a natural state that can be abridged.

Let's avoid the circular argument there, it is possible nature itself is a computer program and this is all just virtual reality until proven otherwise.

You can lead horses to water, and you can even teach horses where the water is....but its upt to the horse to drink it.

You can show a scientist all the science classes he or she ever needs to conclude everything about life except life itself, but you can't make that scientist drink from the fountain of life.

Originally posted by butcherguy
I tied looking up 'infinite death', all I could find was this: www.lyricsmania.com...

OMG! No I didn't need to read that. I want my previous few seconds back before I did.

What is infinite death? I have never heard of the term.

You've heard of infinite life?

Wouldn't infinite death be the opposite of infinite life?

Mumbo-jumbo. You needed big thread to start asking mumbo-jumbo. Reorganizing things people are typing and adding a dash of crazy with paranormal word salad - always a great type of poster.

Originally posted by Aeons
Mumbo-jumbo. You needed big thread to start asking mumbo-jumbo. Reorganizing things people are typing and adding a dash of crazy with paranormal word salad - always a great type of poster.

No.

It's just people who think like you is what gives me more confidence of how many won't actually get to know any of the knowledge of nature and what's beyond their so-called well-defined science.

I feel safer.