Titorite,
Try to follow my reasoning here instead of ripping into me with all these wild accusations.
Everything regarding the Titor saga is based on what? ...The posts and those involved who apparently communicated with Titor.
What are the posts? They are words on a screen structured in an order, called language, used to convey information.
Words on a screen are not tangible proof of anything. They are simply words with meanings. They are either true or false. And if you cannot verify their meaning as true, then you cannot produce any conclusion based on them which is verifiable either.
For example; If there is a statement that says there is an Ox in your living room, in order to verify the statement, you must check your living room for an Ox. If the statement does not specify which living room, then all you have to go by is a statement saying that there is an Ox in a living room. You must assume it is true, that there is an Ox in a living room somewhere. And it would not make sense to call animal control to remove the Ox. What Ox? Where is it?
The same is true with the Titor posts. If it mentions a time machine, without proof of a time machine or evidence of time travel, you cannot consider it as anything but words. Thus it would not make sense to try to speculate on it's capabilities. What time machine? There is a distinct difference between a time machine, evidence of time travel, and words on a screen.
Take that one step further and consider that the words vary because there are more than one version of the posts. So in order to verify, you must first figure out which of them is authentic, then use that information as your basis for verification. But if you have no understanding of which is authentic or have corresponding facts to compare it to, there is no means of discerning truth of the words. It is all purely speculation based on more than one premise.
It is like the example above, only there are three statements. One says it is a leopard at the front door, another says it is a bear in the closet next to the shoe rack, and another saying it is a lion eating in the kitchen, but it doesn't say which house. First you have to find the house, then check the front porch, closet, and kitchen. Otherwise it is just bullshit.
No one knows the true identity of Titor, the true specifications or capability of the machines described, the reality of the political or social situations described, the existence of the 177th Recon Unit, etc, etc, etc, ....nothing, just words. The only thing people can conclude from the posts are things that can be verified such as knowledge of the 5100, and only because there really is a computer model called the 5100 with characteristics as described.
He also mentioned that Jesus never showed up. Should people abandon their religion because of words on a screen? Should people have faith in Jesus because of words on paper? It is the same difference.
What else do people have to go by? The people who apparently interacted with Titor, right? And any conclusions must be based on the accounts of those people. Unless those people can produce proof or evidence of their claims, then it cannot be verified. You must have faith in them. You must assume they are telling the truth.
I can tell you I saw Bigfoot or aliens, but without a photo or footprints or something that can be used to derive information from, it is just hearsay.
If their information is inconsistent, then you cannot even assume they are truthful. And there are all kinds of inconsistencies in their accounts and information they put out there.
For example; People know Kay Titor. They talk to her, have her as a guests on radio shows, etc. They know her and things about her, yet they have no idea who her son is? They have all this credible information, they know how to confirm his identity, they know when he will show up, yet, conveniently, they don't know who he is?
This is not an issue of ego. It is an issue of verifiable information and drawing conclusions from incomplete or invalidated premises. It is about [in]consistencies and reasoning.
You cannot say who is or is not an imposter without knowing the true identity of Titor, any more than you can say who his mother is, or where he was born, etc, etc.
You cannot say that time travel is real because Titor has credibility in his knowledge of computer systems. But you can say that he knows about the 5100. If I told you that my screen name is AAA, (which is verifiable) then told you I have an alien living in my garage, but refused to say where, would you believe it because my screen name really is AAA?
I could go on, but I think you get the point. ..or at least I hope you do.
Try to follow my reasoning here instead of ripping into me with all these wild accusations.
Everything regarding the Titor saga is based on what? ...The posts and those involved who apparently communicated with Titor.
What are the posts? They are words on a screen structured in an order, called language, used to convey information.
Words on a screen are not tangible proof of anything. They are simply words with meanings. They are either true or false. And if you cannot verify their meaning as true, then you cannot produce any conclusion based on them which is verifiable either.
For example; If there is a statement that says there is an Ox in your living room, in order to verify the statement, you must check your living room for an Ox. If the statement does not specify which living room, then all you have to go by is a statement saying that there is an Ox in a living room. You must assume it is true, that there is an Ox in a living room somewhere. And it would not make sense to call animal control to remove the Ox. What Ox? Where is it?
The same is true with the Titor posts. If it mentions a time machine, without proof of a time machine or evidence of time travel, you cannot consider it as anything but words. Thus it would not make sense to try to speculate on it's capabilities. What time machine? There is a distinct difference between a time machine, evidence of time travel, and words on a screen.
Take that one step further and consider that the words vary because there are more than one version of the posts. So in order to verify, you must first figure out which of them is authentic, then use that information as your basis for verification. But if you have no understanding of which is authentic or have corresponding facts to compare it to, there is no means of discerning truth of the words. It is all purely speculation based on more than one premise.
It is like the example above, only there are three statements. One says it is a leopard at the front door, another says it is a bear in the closet next to the shoe rack, and another saying it is a lion eating in the kitchen, but it doesn't say which house. First you have to find the house, then check the front porch, closet, and kitchen. Otherwise it is just bullshit.
No one knows the true identity of Titor, the true specifications or capability of the machines described, the reality of the political or social situations described, the existence of the 177th Recon Unit, etc, etc, etc, ....nothing, just words. The only thing people can conclude from the posts are things that can be verified such as knowledge of the 5100, and only because there really is a computer model called the 5100 with characteristics as described.
He also mentioned that Jesus never showed up. Should people abandon their religion because of words on a screen? Should people have faith in Jesus because of words on paper? It is the same difference.
What else do people have to go by? The people who apparently interacted with Titor, right? And any conclusions must be based on the accounts of those people. Unless those people can produce proof or evidence of their claims, then it cannot be verified. You must have faith in them. You must assume they are telling the truth.
I can tell you I saw Bigfoot or aliens, but without a photo or footprints or something that can be used to derive information from, it is just hearsay.
If their information is inconsistent, then you cannot even assume they are truthful. And there are all kinds of inconsistencies in their accounts and information they put out there.
For example; People know Kay Titor. They talk to her, have her as a guests on radio shows, etc. They know her and things about her, yet they have no idea who her son is? They have all this credible information, they know how to confirm his identity, they know when he will show up, yet, conveniently, they don't know who he is?
This is not an issue of ego. It is an issue of verifiable information and drawing conclusions from incomplete or invalidated premises. It is about [in]consistencies and reasoning.
You cannot say who is or is not an imposter without knowing the true identity of Titor, any more than you can say who his mother is, or where he was born, etc, etc.
You cannot say that time travel is real because Titor has credibility in his knowledge of computer systems. But you can say that he knows about the 5100. If I told you that my screen name is AAA, (which is verifiable) then told you I have an alien living in my garage, but refused to say where, would you believe it because my screen name really is AAA?
I could go on, but I think you get the point. ..or at least I hope you do.
Last edited:
