Element115
Member
- Messages
- 165
Makes sense. Then by that fact alone John Titor is only ascribing time travel as a reality but not any other reality being similar to ours. Therefore, my deciding to eat a brownie or not eat a brownie is in itself creating a timeline offset that could diverge into another reality altogether. If someone were to end up destroying this reality as we know it, only a finite amount of universes in the infinite scheme of things would end, but the rest would go on. That sort of begs the question... which reality is the correct one? Can all realities find an end, or are all realities simultaneously present until only one remains? What is "the end".Not at all! The thing is; John Titor established that the Multiple World Theory is the correct one. This is to say, that every possible situation exists, and if it does not currently exist-- it will spawn an entirely new timeline once it does. He took the time to clarify as well that his predictions and statements might differ from what we experience, simply because he came from a different timeline, with a different set of circumstances that ordained it. In layman terms, he said that everything he said should be taken with a serious grain of salt; that him communicating with us at all really meant nothing, considering he'd only made his way to our timeline to recover an IBM-5000 computer with which to debug some legacy programs for the government he worked for.
In truth, due to the plausibility of his claim -- that everything he said could be wrong, as the differences between timelines and universes can be vast, or insignificant, and he did not know where our own timeline lied in comparison to his own -- there is no one-hundred percent certain way of ever knowing John Titor was a genuine time traveler, unless we somehow manage to prove the Multiple Worlds Theory on our own accord. Whether or not John Titor was a genuine time travel, as things currently stand, is totally a matter of whether you, entirely subjectively, interpret the plausibility of his claims to lean towards fact, or for them to lean towards fiction.