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.

 

What would you do if you 'knew'?

page: 10
14
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Think of it like this...

If 'God' is the sum total of all things, consciousness included, what would be the benefit of having all those eyes, ears, hearts and minds out there?

To collect original experiences, based on the illusion of free will.

That is something 'God' couldn't technically do for itself, since it sees and knows all.

Set up some precepts, and watch the monkeys dance.

Do we intervene when our sea monkeys eat each other?

No, we enjoy our Sea Monkey Tank for its overall entertainment.

Good AND Evil.




posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by megabogie
reply to post by jimnuggits
 


But how could the soul learn a lesson if they chose not to follow the prompt?


Can you imagine the despair of having to live the rest of your life knowing you could have stopped thousands of innocent deaths? I think there's multiple lessons in there.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


I only saw that OP accounted for his/her mental health. The other issues? Please point them out to me. Maybe I missed them.

It isn't the input at all. I'm just pointing out that there are many things we have to account for in having this conversation. A BSC individual asking this question versus having this discussion with a rational, mature person would required different approaches.

For instance, I would be greatly concerned if I had a dream that prompted me to murder another individual and my mental health is just fine. I would also tread lightly in having this broad discussion with another individual when I don't know their background and ability to process information in a realistic manner.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:11 PM
link   
It's rapidly approaching the time where a clear consensus is made.

So to anyone following this thread... Please include an answer in your posts, make it simple and to the point as much as possible... Would you (given what is available in my posts in this thread) kill this man, sacrificing yourself in the process? Or would you choose no action? and last.. Would you choose another option despite likely failure to mitigate the worst possible outcome?

Of course, any and all other content are welcome as well.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade

Originally posted by muzzleflash

I see what the point of this is and I am defeating that point.


You could be hardening the resolve here as well.

Again, how do you reconcile inaction, in this case, as outlined in the OP, when it comes to pass, as seen and known and you did nothing?



I would see this as "I did nothing" and therefore I am not blame.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

Originally posted by LiveEquation
I think experience is not all that counts since experiences are not 'truth' but are subjective too.


Truth is not what counts to an individual because truth is shaped by belief. Belief is gained from experience. So I disagree with you, experience is what counts


If experience was all that counted, the world as a whole would not have gotten past the stone age experience.

The unkowns and their potential to happen( our lack of experience or things not experienced yet) got us where we are today.

Truth is not shaped by beliefs. People choose to equate truth with faith.

Truth is something that cannot change no matter what is done to it. There is nothing like that in this world. Only an idea can suggest that.

The OP is full of suggestive ideas that embark on our moral fabric (that is also subjective)
edit on 18-9-2011 by LiveEquation because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by jennybee35
I really have no idea. The thought of 'saving the world' is very tempting, but actually altering the course of human history would not be a responsibility I would be anxious to take on.

Too many possible, infinite outcomes for my brain to process. Whose plan are we living by anyway? Would I have any right to assume I could interfere with it?
edit on 9/17/11 by jennybee35 because: (no reason given)


He's not going back in time, so "history" would not be altered. He is receiving information about future events. Killing the BG would only create history, not alter it.

If I could confirm that what I was seeing was indeed future vents, then I might act. I couldn't make a decision unless I were faced with the actual scenario and assessed my thoughts and feelings at that time.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by LiveEquation
 


'Truth' is absolutely shaped by belief.

If I believe that Jesus is God's love child, that is my 'truth.'

Your 'truth' may not be that at all.

Depends on what 'you' believe.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
If I could go back in time. If I had only one bullet. If I had to choose between Hitler and FDR. I would shoot the one who did the most lasting damage to the US. Hint, it wasn't Hitler.


Are you F*CKING kidding me????



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by LiveEquation
Truth is not shaped by beliefs. People choose to equate truth with faith.

Truth is something that cannot change no matter what is done to it. There is nothing like that in this world. Only an idea can suggest that.


You are quite right and I stated that incorrectly. People's perceptions of truth are shaped by their beliefs is what I meant to say. I don't equate truth with faith however some might. Perceptions are all we have really and they are shaped on experience.

edit on 18/9/2011 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   
With this kind of insight you would know Hitler would eventually destroy himself. I myself would be worried about ruining the timeline, that is if things happen for a reason...



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   
If I could see the wolrd and understand the full implcations with Hitler dead before a rise to power I would choose the lesser of the 2 evils.

My personal opinion is that Hitler as been demonized far past his or his people capicity for evil only because they lost. Lets face it of the leaders about at the time Stalin provide to be far worse than Hitler.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Theprimevoyager
 


This I do agree.

2nd



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
What if the evil man this person has be shown is himself? He's invented or going to invent what he thinks will cure cancer or AIDS or some other miracle type scenario but the actual serum will cause mass death instead. The backers of said miracle drug are looking to make mega millions and will not let him destroy this drug and his only option would be to take the serum himself at this press conference and demonstrate to those present what it would do. Yet this person thought his invention would help mankind rather than destroy it and maybe does not believe the vision they have been shown.......



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

If I could confirm that what I was seeing was indeed future vents, then I might act. I couldn't make a decision unless I were faced with the actual scenario and assessed my thoughts and feelings at that time.


In the opening post, you'll see where these events were tested and proven... There are things that you may see in premonitions, psychic revealings... Nothing in those can compare to "knowing" with absolute certainty, and ultimately testing it by intervening in events before they happen.

But, in this case... Maybe this one is wrong?

Now is not the time for indecision, or inaction... Unless it is entirely willful.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
First I need to make it clear that in no way am I endorsing anybody to kill anybody else. As far as I am concerned this is only a hypothetical question.

I also need to make it known that in the OP's question he mentioned going into the past and killing Hitler and to that I would say no. Changing the past would be something I would not want to mess with. But as far as I am concerned, the future is up for grabs. And even though I really wouldn't want to kill anyone, in this case I don't see how I could not. I would end up being just as responsible for people dying as the guy with the vial. Because I stood by and did nothing.


This is so much reminding me of that movie "The Dead Zone"....anyone remember that movie? The hero didn't kill the man outright but he killed him politically....



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade

Originally posted by watermama
There are times when I think this world would be a much better place without humans....or at least without so many!


Interesting, that is exactly what this man believes, and that is the core of his motive.


He will go off-grid, in about 43.5 hours, untouchable and unreachable...

7 years was the timeline in the "experience" there are variables, but the unmitigated outcome is certain. If you choose to identify him, expose the plot, do everything you can to stop him, you wont get far, before you are removed from the equation... All of those efforts are doomed to fail, but I suppose it is a better option than the other?

You have about 43.5 hours remaining....


So what do you see AFTER this man carries this out? Does the world ultimately improve?

What do you see AFTER you stop him? Does the world end up killing itself anyway?

The real question is- which choice is the lesser evil? Because, by extension, your choice is NOT whether or not to kill someone, what it's really about is whether he kills others or not. Now... killing that many people en masse is a terrible way to improve the world and would likely have many unforseen/negative consequences. However... do you see any distance past your two choices to determine if this man is actually doing the RIGHT thing? I mean... either way, both of you ponder committing murder for the greater good... that's playing with seriously f'ed up fire.

Also... any timeline for WHEN this mystery man plans on unleashing such a terrible plan?
edit on 18-9-2011 by NoHierarchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
It's rapidly approaching the time where a clear consensus is made.

So to anyone following this thread... Please include an answer in your posts, make it simple and to the point as much as possible... Would you (given what is available in my posts in this thread) kill this man, sacrificing yourself in the process? Or would you choose no action? and last.. Would you choose another option despite likely failure to mitigate the worst possible outcome?

Of course, any and all other content are welcome as well.





Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
Would you choose another option despite likely failure to mitigate the worst possible outcome?


Dang it, there you go changing the rules.
You inserted the word "likely" in place of your previous "absolutely certain". My answer before was in this post , but now...



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


There really is only one solution here that will work, but it isn't up to me alone to make that choice.

That is also absolutely certain.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I hope everyone would kill this man, it's not a difficult choice.




top topics



 
14
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join