Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travelers
The Time Traveler Test
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="temporal recon" data-source="post: 53770" data-attributes="member: 2826"><p><strong><em>Not THAT is an excellent question, Mr. Peregrini.</em></strong> But of course, you don't believe time travel to the past is possible, so I suppose this little insight will be wasted. Anyone else care to take this question up?</p><p> </p><p></p><p>But useless for your purposes? And this was the original reason for the other thread: <em>what evidence would be enough for someone to accept that TT is real?</em></p><p> </p><p></p><p>that is correct</p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p>At least we seem to have come to a common understanding of the difference between proof, evidence and facts.</p><p> </p><p></p><p>I wonder how many scientists believed breaking the sound barrier would kill the pilot? How many scientists "agreed" on man-caused global warming? Science is not built on consensus, Mr. Peregrini. Finding one, two or several dissenting opinions on a given problem set does not automatically invalidate the opposing theory.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p><span style="color: #ff0000"><strong>Wow, Mr. Peregrini. Google.com is really your friend here when conducting simple and elementary research. </strong></span></p><p>I'm glad to see though in your statement, you didn't ask for "proof." At least we're learning, right? But, evidence <em>does </em>exist that points to multiverse, only one of which is presented here.</p><p><a href="http://phys.org/news/2010-12-scientists-evidence-universes.html" target="_blank">Scientists find first evidence that many universes exist</a></p><p>Are you familiar with brane-theory?</p><p> </p><p></p><p>True enough</p><p></p><p>...or creating "tests" for any potential time travelers as well I see.</p><p>So let me ask you: if you do not believe time travel into the past is or ever will be possible, what use is the test then? </p><p>Are you saying you are willing to change your pronouncement? </p><p>I wonder, what <u>evidence</u> are you using to support your belief that time travel to the past is not possible?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="temporal recon, post: 53770, member: 2826"] [B][I]Not THAT is an excellent question, Mr. Peregrini.[/I][/B] But of course, you don't believe time travel to the past is possible, so I suppose this little insight will be wasted. Anyone else care to take this question up? But useless for your purposes? And this was the original reason for the other thread: [I]what evidence would be enough for someone to accept that TT is real?[/I] that is correct At least we seem to have come to a common understanding of the difference between proof, evidence and facts. I wonder how many scientists believed breaking the sound barrier would kill the pilot? How many scientists "agreed" on man-caused global warming? Science is not built on consensus, Mr. Peregrini. Finding one, two or several dissenting opinions on a given problem set does not automatically invalidate the opposing theory. [COLOR=#ff0000][B]Wow, Mr. Peregrini. Google.com is really your friend here when conducting simple and elementary research. [/B][/COLOR] I'm glad to see though in your statement, you didn't ask for "proof." At least we're learning, right? But, evidence [I]does [/I]exist that points to multiverse, only one of which is presented here. [url="http://phys.org/news/2010-12-scientists-evidence-universes.html"]Scientists find first evidence that many universes exist[/url] Are you familiar with brane-theory? True enough ...or creating "tests" for any potential time travelers as well I see. So let me ask you: if you do not believe time travel into the past is or ever will be possible, what use is the test then? Are you saying you are willing to change your pronouncement? I wonder, what [U]evidence[/U] are you using to support your belief that time travel to the past is not possible? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travelers
The Time Traveler Test
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top