It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

John Titor's Y2K

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally by John Titor
If you could go back in time to 1941 and tell the radar operators to take a second look at the radar screen on December 7th, would you? Before you say yes and accept that parade in your honor down main street, perhaps you should go forward in time and see if the U.S still had the motivation to make the A-bomb before Hitler did.
www.timetravelportal.com...
...

Yes, the Pearl Harbor example relates to Y2K. Have you considered that I might already have accidentally screwed up your worldline?
www.timetravelportal.com...

...

What amazes me is why no one here wonders why Y2K didn’t hit them at all?
www.abovetopsecret.com...


John stated that he first went back to 1975 to collect an IBM 5100 from his grandfather with some modifications to provide a solution to the Y2K38 problem; where the 32 bit registers wouldn't be able to store the date after that time, as I understand it.

I was reading over the recreation of his Art Bell posts and the above statements took my attention.

Maybe John had altered our time-line by going back to 1975 and informing his grandfather of the Y2K38 problem, effectively creating an alternate outcome for our Y2K 'bug'.

The supposed 2% divergence would prevent "that" world-line from being the same as "our" world-line, but could it have an effect none-the-less?

This could explain his reason for jumping forward to the beginning of the year 2001, to see if his actions in 1975 had any effect on the outcome of the Y2K 'bug'.

Maybe that was his 'secret agenda', amongst other things. . .

Please, no 'John Titor is a hoax' flames.
I am trying to start an open minded discussion, not a close minded argument; and forgive me if this is old ground, I did search the ATS site, but couldn't find one on this particular issue.

[edit on 24-7-2004 by shanti23]




posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 08:09 PM
link   
if the person claiming to be "john titor, time traveller" WAS a hoaxter, i don't think we should patronize his anally intrusive hoax by engaging in any open minded discussion about it.

i don't think opening our minds to the intellectual equivilent of a computer virus is much better than closing them to the possibility of a time traveller posting on ATS.

JOHN TITOR IS A HOAX!!

sorry, couldn't resist....


(when
will i learn
to proofread my
darned posts???)

[edit on 24-7-2004 by victor was right]



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 12:48 AM
link   
Maybe he did alter our time line then again it might of been inevitable. :S Like Terminator



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 12:56 AM
link   
no, he went to 2001 because you can only jump so far with certainty, I think it was like 30 years at a time. Check out the ATS JT stuff, there are like 19 pages with all his statements, here's the link:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by victor was right
if the person claiming to be "john titor, time traveller" WAS a hoaxter, i don't think we should patronize his anally intrusive hoax by engaging in any open minded discussion about it.


well until it's proven either way it's not a hoax. Please discuss it in the thread made for issues concerning his validity.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 05:53 AM
link   
I did state in my initial post that I did not want this discussion to cover whether or not it was a hoax.
I would prefer a different 'hoax' thread like JOHNSmith has pointed out and a more constructive approach with ideas, examples and links, but that's the internet for you


But, since we're on that page, the best 'John Titor is a hoax' proof is here:

www.anomalies.net...

The laser light photo taken from inside the Corvette.
This shows slight inaccuracies with the laser beam and the fact that the 'instructor' is sitting in the passenger seat; the point being: where would the C204 time travel machine go as the Corvette does not have a back seat?

Getting back to the Y2K idea. . .

Originally by JOHNSmith
no, he went to 2001 because you can only jump so far with certainty, I think it was like 30 years at a time.


Well, he went back from 2036 directly to 1975 and gives the reason for jumping forwards to 2001 as:


Originally by John Titor
TimeTravel_0 : Im here because of a promise to my grandfather in 1975.

timetravelportal.com...


I just get the feeling that he was trying to say that he inadvertantly caused a change in our timeline by going back to 1975 and telling one of the IBM engineers about the registers and there inability to store the dates past 2000.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by shanti23
But, since we're on that page, the best 'John Titor is a hoax' proof is here:

www.anomalies.net...


I saw the supposed hoax proof and I disagree, see my post about it here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by J0HNSmith

Originally posted by shanti23
But, since we're on that page, the best 'John Titor is a hoax' proof is here:

www.anomalies.net...


I saw the supposed hoax proof and I disagree, see my post about it here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


I agree JOHNSmith.
As far as I'm concerned I'm keeping an open mind on John Titor and don't want to close any doors on this fascinating story.
Especially since Stephen Hawking has recently taken back his ideas on black holes and now states that information can pass through.

The fact is, the laser pointer photo is the only 'evidence' against John Titor and even that is based on assumptions.

Thank you for the link, I had missed that thread.

Argh! This thread degenerated into a hoax/not hoax thread


Here is a recreation of his final post:

www.timetravelportal.com...

Where he states:



What amazes me is why no one here wonders why Y2K didn’t hit them at all?


This is the clue and the point of this thread.
Did he inadvertantly prevent the Y2K 'bug'?

[edit on 25-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Although in saying that, I did notice this one inconsistency:


Originally by John Titor
As far as the future goes, your worldline is about 2.5% different than mine. This is a roughly cumulative measurement based on my arrival in 1975.



Originally by John Titor
Good thinking but that’s not exactly the way they work and divergence is not cumulative.


Hmm. . . Is divergence cumulative, or not?

[edit on 25-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 08:12 AM
link   
the Y2k bug didnt hit because most programmers spent all year 1999 working 80 hour weeks to fix it.



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
the Y2k bug didnt hit because most programmers spent all year 1999 working 80 hour weeks to fix it.


Obviously, but who called the shot?
Who was the first to realise the register mistake?

Was it IBM? they were the ones who created the 'bug' in the first place.

[edit on 30-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Nice theory. This may or may not be true. Do you but into the idea that UFO's may be time travel devices?



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 09:59 AM
link   
UFOs as time travel devices?

Maybe. . .

As current physics tells us, the speed of light is the limit in our known physical universe.
There would have to be a mothership somewhere close to our solar system in order for the UFOs to overcome this obstacle - unless they possessed some other means of transportation.

We would be limiting the possibilities if we didn't include the idea that these UFOs could be coming to us from somewhere else other than the physical space we are able to experience.

Although that is not to say that there might be some extra-terrestrials who, like us, would use a more 'primitive' technology to transverse space and time, such as an ion drive or a solar sail coupled with cryogenic stasis or a colony ship.

A machine capable of jumping 'dimensions' or time would overcome these limitations.

[edit on 30-7-2004 by shanti23]



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 09:08 PM
link   
The thing is oddly enough my father a computer tech showed me how an 8086 IBM jr kept the time it showed a 4 digit year... there ewas no real Y2K for personal computers at home the main problem was with 20-30 year old mainframes that were meant to be upgraded by the time 2000 was around but weren't because they were still working fine

...

so if we were supposed to have Y2K why didt we.. IBM and INTEL already knew of the problem maybe?

maybe John Titor let6 something slip... maybe it is something he'ss mearly curious of.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Good OP. I was thinking of starting a thread along these lines myself, im glad you did it instead, i dont think i could have done as well of a job.

I tend to agree with you (If Titor was true)... it does seem to me that since y2k happened in his timeline and not in ours that would explain alot about why some of his ither 'predictions' have not come to pass... the trickle down effect through time of that one single change would be tremendous.

Grock



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join