Originally posted by intrinsic
Originally posted by ReelView
Time simply doesn't exist as part of nature.
And whatever you say is true bcuz u said so, oh and plus u used word salad like a typical narcissist. Yeah: time is just an illusion, that is why you and everyone else lives their lives timing when they will do things or do you just try and do everything at the same time lol?
• The Swiss watch and clock industry appeared in Geneva in the middle of the 16th century. In 1541AD, reforms implemented by Jean Calvin and banning the wear of jewels, forced the goldsmiths and other jewellers to turn into a new, independent craft: watch-making. The commercial manufacture of Swiss watches could have been pre-dated by individual craftsmen creating time-pieces. By the 16th Century, China had maritime trade with the Portuguese, Spanish, Japanese and Dutch. It is feasible therefore that the inhabitant of the coffin (dated around 1600AD) may have been a wealthy traveller, or could have purchased the item from a travelling merchant – Smaller communities and townships too poor or scattered to support shops and artisans obtained their goods from periodic market fairs and travelling peddlers. The watch could have been a prized possession – European Jesuits who visited China in the 16th century reported that European timekeeping was far more advanced than that encountered in China. The Chinese people marked time with water, incense and sand clocks. An in depth examination of the watch could reveal more information. • The ring watch could have been manufactured at a later date, dropped by a visitor to or near to the tomb at any time, it could have been dropped in the dirt and solidified, the clump could have been kicked or knocked into the tomb area by anyone around the dig. Without knowing the circumstances and conditions of the dig, it is impossible to rule out.
Originally posted by ucalien
reply to post by wayaboveitall
Excellent Stuff, dont know how you found that pic, Thats what I think the glasses are, ad that they only look like sunglasses because behind the lenses is in shadow.
Think twice. The "shadow" behind the lens you are referring to, is darker than the shadow cast that is extending from the ear to the chin and makes a perfect 45° angle with the lens frame. IMO it's not a shadow, but part of the frame.
The problem with the OP's suggestion is that the above photos really fail the Occam's Razor test. Sure, on the surface his glasses don't look very typical of the period, and his hairstyle is a bit funky. But to take the incredibly MASSIVE step of proving time travel, we would need to rule out all the other much more plausible explanations.
For the time traveler guy photo, look at the lady two down from his right. She is looking right at his camera with a kind of odd smile.
Originally posted by thesillygirl
I think this is another of those "either you believe and no proof is necessary or you don't believe and no proof will change your mind"
That's one of the things that sucks about the invention of programs like Photoshop, even if you have photographic evidence, it's hard to have any proof.