Jump to content

Oternative

Members
  • Posts

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

3 Neutral
  1. A: Tastes Great! B: Less Filling! A: Tastes Great! B: Less Filling! A: Tastes Great! B: Less Filling! ? You're oversimplifying it. Check it out ...It also includes liquor and wine, one of which is hardly filling at all but tastes like shit without mixing is with something, the other tastes great AND is less filling. A: What kind of barley does it use? B: What kind of hops? ? Actually, it uses things like corn and rice. The other uses fruit. A: Liar! B: Idiot! Everyone knows ale is made from barley and hops. ? But it's not just about beer. That's what I am trying to tell you. A: Answer the question, fool. ? But the question is out of context. B: Bull! I know all about beer because I come from a long line of brewery owners. ? It's not just beer, and it is fermented or distilled. The process is a little different for the others. Are you not listening? A: Show us the barley fields or get lost, liar. ? It's not made with barley. It's made with fruit, usually grapes, and the place they grow is called a vineyard. B: Fruity beer is for sissies. ? It's not just about the beer! It includes other things. And what does our egos have to do with it? A: Prove it. ? I am trying to show you. If you will just indulge me long enough I will. Here, ..check this link out. B: That's not a barley field. A: ...and the pictures have been photo-shopped. ? No, it's just a vineyard. They're everywhere. You just have to look for them and you can see for yourself. A: If it's not beer, I don't care. B: I do. Make him prove it. ? Look, I have a whole shelf full of it in my cellar. I'll go get a few bottles and share so you can taste for yourself. I need a corkscrew to open them though. A: I never heard of a corkscrew. You must be full of it. B: Yeah, that's a dumb excuse. You don't have any fruity beer. And what's a corkscrew? ? Uhhgh! IT'S NOT BEER! IT'S CALLED WINE! ..and a corkscrew is the tool to open the bottles? B: Why not use a bottle opener? ? Because it's sealed with a cork and not a bottle cap. A: Bull! Ain't no beer sealed with a cork, ...even fruity beer. ? It's not beer! B: Whatever, liar. ? I can prove it. I just need a little help finding a corkscrew. Do you mind giving me a ride to the store so I can get one, then to my house so I can get you a few bottles of it? You'll really enjoy it. B: What's in it for us? ? I just told you. I am going to answer your questions, show you something new, and give you some delicious very little filling alcoholic beverage. I just need a little help, that's all. A: You're talking in circles, liar. ? I AM? YOU are the one talking in circles. Geeze! B: Ban his dumb ass! Lock this liar's account! ? Ya know what? ...never mind. I don't have to share. I'll drink it myself. Enjoy your beer. A: Piss off, liar! ? Whatever. ...later.
  2. I recommend you go to the thread titled "I am John Titor" and read a related and continuation of this conversation.
  3. Further, I am most curious as to how the original posts as posted here were altered from the original, then changed again. Why would anyone want to do that? What possible motive would there be for such a thing? To obfuscate perhaps? COuld it be that someone here indeed does understand there is something encrypted in them and wants to interfere for some reason? It is apparent to me there are ulterior motives here. ..and another reason not to participate. Actually, I am trying to proceed. But it is more than difficult when anything shared (by me or others) is immediately shot down because it is not a DeLorean. I think I have said enough. Goodbye, ...perhaps another day.
  4. Cosmo, Everyone is looking at the Titor saga from a literal and face value perspective. What I see is different, and goes beyond that. Unless I can get you all to understand this as a first step, then it is pointless to continue. This is why I spend the time explaining the mechanics such as in the above mentioned hypothetical. It is a preparatory step to understanding the rest. But I can see that this is pointless to even try with you people. You are not open to much of anything. You just want to see a DeLorean, and anything else is BS. I am not interested in arguing, but rather exploring. It is clear that you have no interest in doing so, and that my time here is time wasted.
  5. Einstein, You continue to use the debunking of a video as a basis for discrediting everything else, including what you have not yet examined. Your position is similar to saying that Krusty the clown is not a natural red head, therefore there is no such thing as a clown with natural red hair. Then when someone suggests they have evidence to the contrary, you do not want to see it, but rather stay focused on Krusty alone. That doesn't sound very intelligent, especially for someone who calls themselves Einstein. Why do you not address other points I have made? Why continue focusing on a faux video? Are you afraid there may actually be some legitimacy to this stuff? And again, I will reiterate, I AM NOT MAKING A DEFINITIVE CLAIM. I AM TRYING TO ANALYZE AND INTERPRET THINGS WITH REASON IN ORDER TO DETERMINE TRUTH. But we cannot even get to that point if you refuse to indulge and consider any context that differs from your preconceived notions. Now, if you do not want to discuss it, if you do not want to use your superior intellect to assist me, if this conversation is not welcome here, I can go somewhere else and/or invite others who do to join me.
  6. If anyone is interested in actually further discussing this and examining things, I have a website that I have recently set up. It isn't quite ready yet, but is accessible, ...or should be. https://laremnant.wordpress.com/
  7. You apparently do not. We obviously do. If you do not, then why are you here?
  8. Cosmo, Your pointless rhetoric is not helping any. Posts like these ARE me trying to progress it further. I am trying to start a dialogue, trying to put things into perspective before continuing. But if you are unwilling to take an intelligent approach, if you are unwilling to think beyond your own preconceptions, it is pointless. This is not as simple as me showing you a time machine. It requires actually thinking and analyzing beyond the norm. Intellectual laziness will get us nowhere. I find it interesting how you are so quick to dismiss and criticize before even indulging. Why not even consider it? Hmmm? Is your attention span so short that unless someone is here with a DeLorean and a flux capacitor in your face, you get bored and it isn't worth discussing? You don't accept what you have not yet examined? How does that work? If you are unwilling to consider the reality of time travel, then why do you even have this site? What is the point? ...to lure people to be ridiculed and dismissed? You express that you don't want me to leave. You erase the link I posted to take this elsewhere beyond your control. Yet when I stick around instead, you ridicule me? WTF, bro? Do you just want to control the conversation for some strange reason? How do you expect me to be open about it if the result will be ridicule and dismissal? Because I can just as well go elsewhere. Perhaps I should, no? Further, ... As I have already stated, I am somewhat hesitant to reveal things because of the particularly volitile nature of the circumstances I am dealing with. I wasn't kidding the other day in what I said in our private conversation. This is serious.
  9. Not necessarily. Proofs can be obtained through reason, logic... which is the case in what I am seeing. Indeed. What I am dealing with is more like information derived from observable fact and verified through deductive reasoning. Not yet. Perhaps I never will. Maybe I already have. Once again, I feel it necessary to reiterate my position. I am not so much claiming to be John Titor. I am trying to figure it out and confirm it as much or more so than you are. First of all, Titor is a fictitious name, thus we must first define that. As I already mentioned, whoever wrote those posts claimed the name of John Titor, which is apparently a cryptic reference to my identity in the context of my life's circumstances that also corresponds to a number of other such references. Thus since the person posting as Titor spoke in first person as Titor, and it is a cryptic reference to me, then I am by order of reason, Titor. But I am not willing to accept that so easily. It is not definitive. It does not mean that I am the same person. It could be me or someone speaking about me in code. What do you think message 177 means when it says " I am John Titor", then corrects and says "I am the man you know as John Titor"? It is an ambiguous statement differentiating him from someone (probably me) and arguably in the context of this very conversation. I will try to give you a hypothetical example to demonstrate the logic in the things I have been experiencing. It may help you better understand. If I were to say to you that " You look good in khakis and Tuesday pizza", you would dismiss it as a nonsensical statement, maybe accuse me of being crazy or gay or something. It makes no sense, ...yet. A month later on a Tuesday you are wearing khakis and have just arrived home after a long day. Your wife has made a pizza and has it sitting on the kitchen counter for you. You put a few pieces on a plate and walk toward the dining room table. On your trek you trip and fall, spilling pizza all over your clean khakis. Suddenly you remember my statement and deduce that I must have somehow known of this event ahead of time. You have just watched after the fact knowledge travel to a before the fact point in time. If you were to try to explain it to someone, they would not believe you, nor could you prove it. But you observed the fact of me saying this to you, even though you did not record it and therefore have no tangible proof of the circumstances. By order of reason, the odds and uniqueness of the circumstances, the accidental nature of it, and because it was preconception, you have conclusive evidence of information traveling backward. From your perspective, it is 'proof' of 'time travel'. Okay, now take that same scenario and switch a verbal statement with a written one. That is what I am looking at. And there is a lot of it. I hope that helps you better understand. If I need to further clarify, please engage, ...lets analyze this. Because I really want to try to figure this out.
  10. Then why does your statement appear as if you are ridiculing? Perhaps you'd like to share what you're reading?
  11. What if it isn't BS? What if it is actually real? What if your statement is true? Just as a thought exercise, consider this; What if you discovered a large body of strong evidence (arguably proof) of time travel? And what if it came in the form of information rather than something tangible? What if you could show the whole world any time you like? What if there was a down side to it? What if it came at a personal cost, as well as at a cost to many others? How would you handle it? The idea of proof of time travel sounds awesome. It could serve as hope for the future of our species, as something to look forward to, a reason to get our act together. Why not, right? Well, if it came in the form of something intangible that required an analytical mindset, it would be worthless in regard to all those who are of lesser intellect or are unable to think past their own ego. It would be a waste of time to even try to explain it to them. They already have their minds made up and would reject anything short of a man in a sports car materializing out of thin air. Never mind getting them to accept that it may not work like it does in the movies. They already know everything. And what if it came at a cost? What if showing the world meant that you would die? What if it meant others would die, simply because it would cause an upset in regard to the philosophical and religious and/or political structure in which whole civilizations were based? Would it be worth it? I suppose it may be. All those who would get upset and fight over it would cancel themselves out, thus leaving the rest of us to carry on unimpeded by those who stifle our progression. It could have the effect of culling the herd, so to speak, ...separating the wheat from the chaff. Would it be worth sacrificing your own life in exchange for the betterment of billions as an ultimate long term result? Does humanity even deserve such a thing? When I read statements like yours I am inclined to say 'no'.
  12. I have to admit that's very good. But what the hell are you doing?
  13. Darby, How do you know that isn't the case? Do you have anything to contribute besides skeptic rhetoric?
  14. There are only two people to my knowledge who are able to authenticate any claims of being Titor. One of them is myself through cryptic information within the posts. The other is supposedly Temporal Recon by being able to identify a distinctive physical trait of some kind. I seriously doubt it is the real John Titor.
×
×
  • Create New...