Debate John Titor: Real Time Traveler or a Hoaxer?

[Keroscene]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

How can one call it a prediction with no definite stance? If there were nukes, he still wins. It's only a prediction for those who want it to be. Try and argue that it's not a question, even with that question mark at the end.

 

[Passive_Extremist]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

It was a question alright, a rhetorical one, one designed to make the reader think, I highly doubt JT was waiting for an answer.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Keroscene\")</div>

How can one call it a prediction with no definite stance? [/b]

Well, he didn't come out and say "Keroscene, W is going to lie about WMD to get us into a war" but it was obviously implied.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Keroscene\")</div>

It's only a prediction for those who want it to be. [/b]

So, if he wasn't talking about our current status, what was he referring to?

 

[shane]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

You mean when we where friends with Saddam and financing him?

I must have missed that one. I was refering to our arming of Afghani guerillas. I would have been more specific, but I didn't want to alter the timeline.

So you could predict future wars and lies as accurate as JT did then?

I just did.

 

[Keroscene]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

I thought a rhetorical question was one that an awnser could'nt be provided for, where here is not the case. I could awnser this question if my beliefs respected the position of Iraq having nukes, or not. This is my favorite rhetorical question, "What kind of stupid plan is that?"

Not knowing much about sanctions, but I do believe that Iraqs agreement to terminate Nuclear development after the Gulf War left many loopholes for a possible reconstruction of one after the sanctions had been lifted. This was always a concern, from the beginning, and can be blamed on rushing the sanctions and the US untimely departure after the Gulf War. What other possible scapegoat could have been used for a war with Iraq which justified killing millions of innocents? (911) And no, he didn't say, "W is going to lie about WMD to get us into a war," that is someone taking the question out of context and creating a statement which would then be a prediction.

I hope he was talking about our current status, and we do stabilize Iraq, or this question just might get asked again.

Here are my predictions on a 2001 timeline where I will be proven wrong on one and aren't intended to confuse anyone. (edited for clarity)

Iraq has nukes now.
Just BS to whip everyone up into accepting the next war.

All I need to do is add the word "or", no one can prove anything and I am right no matter what happens.

Here is a prediction that would prove I am a time traveler beyond a reasonable doubt but would'nt have been any use to anyone before the event and would be long gone before anyone caught on.

911 is more than a phone number.

My only question for you is, "Do you agree or not that the prediciton would be proven true wether they found nukes in Iraq or not?" I have awnsered all of yours to the best of my abilities.

JT - "Are you really surprised to find out that Iraq has nukes now or is that just BS to whip everyone up into accepting the next war?"- The more I read it, the more it sounds to me like he thinks they have nukes, and is asking someone to debate that they don't.

 

[pauli]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

\"JT - \"Are you really surprised to find out that Iraq has nukes now or is that just BS to whip everyone up into accepting the next war?\"- The more I read it, the more it sounds to me like he thinks they have nukes, and is asking someone to debate that they don't.\"

I agree with you Keroscene in the comment above. I pretty much think that is what the author was trying to say. The wording of this sentence otherwise does not make sense.

Keep in mind that this was pre-9/11 and everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, believed that Saddam had nukes. That everyone included the EU, President Clinton, and the Prime Minister of England of the time. I read a book in the late 90's written by a man named Khadir Hamsa, "Saddam's Bombmaker," who claimed to have been on the Iraqi staff whose chief job was to make a nuclear bomb. He spoke about what it was like to live under Saddam's regime - not a pretty picture. Basically he stated that they were developing a bomb under the cover of the IAEA and had just about finished the process, minus about half of the required enriched Uranium to finish it. On the date that the Gulf War broke out, Saddam allegedly ran into his place of work and demanded the bomb. He told them he was going to drop it on Israel. When they told him it wasn't ready, he went into a right little fit, but the bomb was not complete. Now, of course the question is did he have it? Or, did he not? It could be he did have the material and destroyed it between the Gulf War and the current war. It could have also been that he buried the material in the sand. Or, he could have moved it. Arial photography, a few weeks prior to the current war, showed a lot of activity moving across the border of Iraq and into Syria. Perhaps it was something, perhaps not. Allegedly, the Russians assisted the Iraqis using trucks which moved something into the Bacah valley. Of course, unless we check this out we will never know for sure. I seriously doubt this is something Assad's son will allow. So this, in part, remains an unanswered question.

 

[Goodwin]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

LAGNAR
What's the matter Goodwin, you don't believe fighting for the truth and ONLY the utter truth is grounds for intellectual superiority?


You're entire argument is based on a value judgement Lagnar. You think that your truth is different to mine? - Its not really you know. Your arguing for your particular truth. And right now that's as subjective as anyone else's in here.

The utter truth you describe we can only grope towards by testing our current beliefs till they stand or fall. And if I come across as hostile, then perhaps I should apologise. But there's few things more likely to make my blood boil than the kind of self-righteous pretension and pomposity you're peddling here. Are you aware that's how you come across?

Besides what's more hostile ? My vehementaly arguing against the credibility of an internet hoaxer? Or that hoaxer promising (almost with glee) that my little girls' only future is a horrible death along with millions upon millions of others like them? Don't you dare talk to me about hostile.

And as far as the all-conquering WMD prediction goes - there's really no escaping Keroscene's observation that 'Titor's' 'prediction' - the one so many here seem in awe of - is a classic win-win statement. In other words, it could easily be read other way around - as 'Titor' confirming that there are in fact nukes in Iraq.

So all you guys who take this as an astonishing fact that only 'Titor' could have known are simply seeing what they want to see.

Go on, read it again and tell me this isn't so.


"<span style='font-family:Verdana'>Are you really surprised to find out that Iraq has nukes now or is that just BS to whip everyone up into accepting the next war?\"</span>


So much for the indisputable 'truth' that 'Titor' saw the no WMDs in Iraq coming! Is there anything this guy said that isn't open to interpretation?

 

[Keroscene]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

Hey if you're so arrogant about your accusations, why don't you debunk JT's no WMD Iraq war prediction?

Why did you ask me for this? Or was it arrogance on your part? I am upset I ever did respond to this now. All I ever wanted to do was discuss things that were interesting to me too, not try to expose flaws in things I like soooo much too. I am my own worst enemy.

 

[Goodwin]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

Yeah, well your observation, Keroscene, that the WMD quote could be interpreted either way may not amount to a debunking but it certainly shows 'Titor' did NOT say unambiguously there would be no WMDs found in Iraq. Well pointed out.

Here are some other general problems for the 'fence-sitters'


pantsblazing:

pantsblogging


? Jewish Half-Breeds | Main | Eigenradio Christmas Album ?

Debunking Alleged Time-Traveller John Titor


December 16, 2004

In November of 2000 a guy calling himself John Titor turned up online claiming to be a time-traveller from 2036. Here are a few thoughts on why it's bullshit.

There's a complete archive of his postings and info at johntitor.com

This was a post on a BBS and is therefore a bit less coherent than it would normally be.

My first though was that he is a normal, present-day guy has a stockpile of the IBM 5100s he's looking for and he's going to get rid of them on eBay.

There are several technology-related conflicts in his story:

1) They can build a ****ing *time machine* and not replicate either the hardware or functionality of that IBM machine? I think not.

2) Even if that could somehow be the case, he negates it by saying that the "Web" (improperly labeled as people in the future who depend on the Internet for all communications, which is more important as travel is much less feasable would be much more aware that the "Web" is a protocol that runs on a network that has many other uses?it's as stupid as referring to the Internet as "The Email") is much faster and handles all communications. This means that they still have the ability to manufacture and refine processors of all kinds (at least CPUs, DSPs, and comm) and work on advanced software. Given that, they do not need IBM portables from the 1970s.

3) Everyone and their brother knew the basic problem of Y2K. If they need 5100s so much that they're willing to take the risk of and develop the technology to send people back in time to help fix it, 2038 is obviously a huge problem for them and it's only two years away (as he claims tobe from 2036). As a society much more dependant on computers than we are, the chance of someone not understanding the problem (which takes about 20 seconds to grasp), especially someone in the position of being sent away from him family and friends to go to a different ****ing time, and at a time when it seems that basic technical literacy would be higher, is nil.

He says: "I'm not exactly sure what the technical issue is but I believe some sort of UNIX system registry stops in 2038." Bull. Shit. ("'unix system registry"??!?)

There's also the basic solution: 64 (or more) bit integers. Just re-define time_t with more bits and recompile. Failing that, it's 2003 and there are 64 bit processors out there and unices using them. As it's considered the next thing and companies are spending billions to develop them, there is good reason to believe that they will be more unbiquitous by 2005 when the war supposedly starts (as unrest, it doesn't become full-blown for several more years). Ergo, no problem.

Even if that's not true, they clearly have processor design and fabrication abilities and working designs would be long-established, so they could fix it themselves. Ergo, no problem.

Or they could have done a software hack (which I've just thought of and there may be problems with, so bear with me), something like modifying the time system calls to use strings behind the scenes, or internally using two time numbers, one for 1970-2038 and one for 2038-whenever the next 32 bit int runs out. Or a binary search and replace that looks through executable code and fixes date types. Something. In any case, going back to an 8 or 16 bit system seems an unlikely solution. Ergo, no problem.

Also, if they knew exactly what would help them about the 5100, they could have replicated it. We're talking about a program that runs on a portable computer from the 1970s, not re-writing a million-plus lines of spaghetti code to replicate XP.

All in all, I think the whole thing is interesting. I think the guy is either a social sciences person just seeing what happens, and generally doing it well, or just some loon.



Comments
at March 26, 2005 08:19 PM

 

[Passive_Extremist]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"shane\")</div>

I must have missed that one.[/b]

I guess you've never seen all that video of dumsfeld shaking hands with saddam in the early 80's or our selling his chemical agents that he used to gas his own people with..

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"shane\")</div>

I was refering to our arming of Afghani guerillas. I would have been more specific, but I didn't want to alter the timeline.[/b]

How was our arming of Osama linked to WMD in iraq?



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"shane\")</div>

I just did.[/b]

So what's our next course of action in the quest for global domination.?

 

[Goodwin]

Re: John Titor Update: Exclusive Report!

Here's some redneck survivalist whose letter ( about two thirds down) describes how 'Titor' is bang on and how he and his fellow militia have been preparing for a civil war for years.


http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2004/08/10.html


Now just supposing that 'Titor's' predictions actually cement the idea of the inevitability of civil war in these people's eyes and tip the chances of it happening in favour of conflict. Actually inspiring one of these bozos to start shooting somewhere. Wheras without 'Titor' it might not have taken place?

Then all this hoo-ha surrounding 'Titor's' claims would actually be responsible for the blood-shed. Anyone any thoughts about this self-fulfilling prophecy scenario?