Originally posted by paperface
Let's just take the example of where Titor mentions "A skyscraper missing in New York." Notice the singular??
Yet, we are missing TWO skyscraper in New York...both WTC1 and 2...also WTC7, so, technically, THREE!!
Is is possible this was NOT a reference to 9/11...but maybe a reference to the building they are planning in PLACE OF the WTC, and he could be
referring to a future event that has YET to be fulfilled?
Unless I am mistaken, WTC is to be replaced by a SINGLE skyscraper, that is 1,776 feet tall? ONE skyscraper!!
Perhaps THIS one gets attacked later? and that THIS is the "A skyscraper missing in New York" that he's referring to, and NOT 9/11?
After all, if he really WAS from 2036...this building would have been built by then, and conceivably could get attacked and brought down again by that
time. Possible, do you suppose...that this reference of Titor's speaks of an event YET TO HAPPEN...and we are misinterpreting it to refer to 9/11,
when, in fact, it may refer to an entirely different event?
Yes i totally agree with you, it is possible it is a completely different observation alltogether. Also if you take the towers that were hit and add
the one that was erected there also leaves one missing 'in time'. But this is also coming from someone who lived through a civil war and a WW3 which
we havent encountered ...yet. So this could be a simple stretch of the imagination. However it does prove to be interesting to say those specific
words in the fax.
My main point of the post was to look at the posts and everything from a different perspective rather than seeing everything as black or white, one or
zero. I dont descredit the information as much as i cling to one explaination the way i've seen most people who post here do. The most of us see one
explaination that makes sense to them in some way and they succumb to it with a cement brick attached to their leg. I'm trying to put John Titor in a
different light for those who see "JOHN TITOR DEFINITE HOAX" all over the internet and just pass it over without looking into it.
Thankyou for replying though i like your thoughts
With your other question pertaining to the future event. I think its very possible that could be the case. Being that John alsmost ritualistically
noted his disdain for our ignorance and its cure being destruction and war i wouldnt doubt the vagueness as being a warning. But to who? Is he warning
someone specifically or just in general? Or was that passage just a code for other Johns. I think its interesting to get opinions on subjects like
these so theres something i may not see before
edit on 26-2-2012 by Whatifitdidhappen because: (no reason given)