Talk:John Titor/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Alas Babylon

I took out a bunch of comparisons to Alas Babylon, as they were all false. In the novel, the capital becomes Denver, not Omaha. Omaha is a primary target. Tampa was also a tertiary target in the novel. There is no ado ption of a teenage boy in the novel. Because of this, no actual comparison could have been made on these points, because it was not referenced, it sounds like whoever wrote it was just making it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.76.75.5 (talk) 05:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Rustyrale

I would like to thank the editor of the most current edtion of this page. Never from both the skeptic or beliver side has this artival been more netural. Bravo wiki. You are my shinning light proveing my theory of anarchy. Which is not in wiki yet... But several other theories are availible. Kudos editor. You edit is by far the best.Rustyrale (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

British Writer

Rumor has it that John Titor is a very popular Liverpudlian writer/director/dramatist living and working in L.A. since the eighties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.14.245.74 (talk) 16:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Larry Haber

A very important part of this article is missing.

Larry Haber.

Larry Haber is the supposed "Entertainment Lawyer" for the family of John Titor. However, most people theorize that Larry Haber IS John Titor. Larry claims that a "friend of his" called him one day, telling him the John Titor story, and that he needed an "Entertainment Lawyer."

Larry is currently working on a John Titor movie... a trailer of which can be found at his youtube account. (A simple search for "John Titor" on youtube will get you there.)

I suggest people research Larry Haber and include him in the article.

IceSage 21:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

(Titor's) Time Travel and Predictions

I don't want to stick up for this guy, but I do sometimes get tired of simple people using simplified concepts to disprove complex things.

Many people have used Titor's predictions that did not come true as proof he was a hoax, but I distinctly heard in several of the interviews about him that Titor claimed that there were infinite timelines and that every future that sent A Titor back in time would have A Titor return thus, "receiving some benefit from their investment." He also said that there was no way that Titor could affect the future in his timeline (IE kill his own father before he was born) because there was no direct link (other than probabilities) between his future and our present.

Still it does seem almost 'magical' how every possible reason for a false prediction is conveniently explained beforehand. Almost like a very well written book. :)

Tiki God 02:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah... That doesn't make his predictions that have been wrong any more correct. A failed prediction is a failed prediction. --Sturmwehr 22:33, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand this claim of parallel timeline. If John Titor was living in a different timeline, then he would travel back to the past of his timeline, not ours. And if he could travel from his timeline to ours, then he should be aware of being in a different timeline. He should notice that the past (our present. I mean, our present when 2000 was the present) is not as described in his history books. Well he didn't. Anyway, in both cases, his timeline or our, we can conclude that all his predictions - past or future; are false. Parnod 22:43, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

Links and Pictures in WebArchive or Websites

WebCrawler Internet Archive Links April 4 and 13th, 2001: The original pictures posted by the person who called him(her)self John Titor. http://web.archive.org/web/20010606231142/http://www.artbell.com/letters11.html This link contains the original posts from the Time Travel Institute thread where this person posted and one can still post on the thread, perhaps: The thread is "Topic Limited to 11 Pages" http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/ttiforum/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=time_travel&Number=9237&page=3&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1 Internet Archive page about the original Art Bell website: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://artbell.com/ Post to Post AM (forums) http://web.archive.org/web/20010331032714/www.artbell.com/bbs.html Click here to enter the Post to Post AM Forum: http://web.archive.org/web/20010402033829/bbs.artbell.com/ Note category -- Time Travel: forumid=25 http://web.archive.org/web/20010405011723/bbs.artbell.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=25 Note the thread entitled "I am from 2036" (as of April 4th, 2001 at 9:44AM) (when the Crawler made a backup for the Internet Archive at that time).

I found the original pages Archived (had to add page number or look through 80 pages of links of the threadid=1203 postings of John Titor.) Page 1 of the thread "I am from 2036" http://web.archive.org/web/20010413040811/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=1 Page 2 http://web.archive.org/web/20010413040629/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=2 Page 3 http://web.archive.org/web/20010413041338/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=3 Page 4 http://web.archive.org/web/20010413041759/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=4 Page 5 http://web.archive.org/web/20010413042026/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=5 Last page (as that is all that was put in the web archive) http://web.archive.org/web/20010413042703/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=lastpage

Page in the Internet Archive where the pages are listed and the date those pages were stored there. http://web.archive.org/web/*sr_871nr_10/http://bbs.artbell.com/* The pages I am referring to: bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=1 1 page from Apr 13, 2001

bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=2 1 page from Apr 13, 2001

bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=3 1 page from Apr 13, 2001

bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=4 1 page from Apr 13, 2001

bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=5 1 page from Apr 13, 2001

bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=lastpage 1 page from Apr 13, 2001

Coast to Coast AM webpage: John Titor: Reactions (Tuesday August 10th, 2004) http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2004/08/10.html

Anomalies page about John Titor - original poster's (not me) friend or himself. http://www.anomalies.net/object/johntitor.html Other threads there copied. One from England. Certainly John Titor must be at least Entertaining. Article about real science paper. (Nature.com) http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050711/pf/050711-4_pf.html

Is John Titor real? I can guess like anyone else, but then he stated that by 2036 you may know. I think the Government using what I term "Time Distortion" to change the world, may or may not help, just as postings made by John Titor or his other name TimeTravel_0 may or may not help. It is suppose to be an intellectual debate about whether time travel will be made by that time around 2034-6. The rest is opinion or conjecture or guessing to the future. Of course, some Government workers read the thread at the original time so........

JJBeat 00:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC) JJBeat May 20th, 2007.

Joke?

Is this article a joke?--Tabun1015 02:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Not quite as pathetic as the Post-structuralism embarrasment! Now that article, my dear friends, is truly hilarious. Juice 19:27, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Real Science Papers from about late 2002 - early 2003

---

I am not adding this to debate anything, as these are real science papers. Note: "How Does Naked Singularity Look?" science paper came out almost a couple years after Titor posted what he posted.

Title: Complex Kerr Geometry, and Nonstationary Kerr Solutions Authors: Alexander Burinskii Comments: v.2, misprints deleted and minor corrections, revtex, 14p, one figure, extended version of the e-print gr-qc/0210010 Subj-class: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology; Mathematical Physics http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0212048v3

Title: Rotating black holes at future colliders: Greybody factors for brane fields Authors: Daisuke Ida, Kin-ya Oda, Seong Chan Park Comments: References added, a minor typo corrected http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0212108

Title: Holography, Time and Quantum Mechanics Authors: Vijay Balasubramanian, Jan de Boer, Djordje Minic Comments: Talk presented at the 3rd Sakharov International Conference on Physics, Moscow, June 2002; to appear in the proceedings of the conference http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0211003v1

Title: Kerr Black Hole as a Quantum Rotator Authors: Gilad Gour, A.J.M. Medved Comments: 15 pages, Revtex http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0211089v1

--Title: Charged black holes: Wave equations for gravitational and electromagnetic perturbations Authors: Zoltán Perjés, Mátyás Vasúth Comments: 12 pages, to appear in Ap.J http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0211036v1

Title: How Does Naked Singularity Look? Authors: Ken-ichi Nakao, Naoki Kobayashi, Hideki Ishihara Comments: 36 pages, 9 figures, version 1 http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0211061v1 Hence, if such null geodesics are really emitted, the naked singularity is observed as a disk-like rainbow.

Title: Building Blocks of a black hole Authors: Jacob D. Bekenstein and Gilad Gour Comments: 16 pages, version 2 http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0202034v2

There are many such papers and too many to list, as I state, this is all theory until I guess the LHC comes on-line and they create black holes and do whatever it is any scientist may do when and if they do create these black holes, as stated already they think they did with the Cosmic Fireball Experiment science paper. The science papers links have been upgraded and do work. Since this is on-going, I think it is noteworthy, but that will not be entirely up to me.

Last link in the Internet Archive Wayback Machine taken as posted by the webcrawler on July 21, 2001. The official notice that the Art Bell BBS Forum was shut down. http://web.archive.org/web/20010722002507/http://bbs.artbell.com/

JJBeat 05:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)JJBeat May 23, 2007. Sorry, no one can prove either way about this person calling him/her-self John Titor, supposed time traveller.

Recent Science Papers

This is what about 7,700 some scientists do and what they want to do - do experiments that provide other clues into their theories.

Title: Extended representations of paths and world lines Authors: Brian H. Dunford-Shore Comments: 15 pages, RevTeX, v2 submitted http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0702022v2

Title: Talking About Singularities Authors: Spiros Cotsakis Comments: 29 pages, latex, rapporteur contribution to the Parallel Session on Cosmological Singularities, MG11, Berlin 2006 http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0703084v1

Title: Bel-Robinson energy and the nature of singularities in isotropic cosmologies Authors: Ifigeneia Klaoudatou, Spiros Cotsakis Comments: 6 pages, to appear in the Proceedings of the Greek Relativity Meeting NEB12, June 29-July 2, 2006, Nauplia, Greece http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0609077v1

Title: Singularities of varying light speed cosmologies Authors: John Miritzis, Spiros Cotsakis Comments: 7 pages, 2 figures, uses iop style files, to appear in the Proceedings of the Greek Relativity Meeting NEB12, June 29-July 2, 2006, Nauplia, Greece http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0609090v1

Title: Asymptotics of flat, radiation universes in quadratic gravity Authors: Spiros Cotsakis, Antonios Tsokaros Comments: 9 pages, latex http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0703043v1

Title: Braneworld cosmological singularities Authors: Ignatios Antoniadis, Spiros Cotsakis, Ifigeneia Klaoudatou Comments: 3 pages, contribution to appear in the Proceedings of the MG11 Meeting, Berlin, July 2006 http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0701033v1 The purpose of this brief report is to present some results of our on-going project on the asymptotic behaviour of braneworld-type solutions on approach to their possible finite ‘time’ singularities.

Now, various people in the Government probably are well-aware of this person claiming what he did. But then, anyone got any suggestions about what to do about the President of Iran? But nonetheless, I think some of these scientists will want to study what they think is out in the Universe, somehow up closer - in the future -- if they can.

JJBeat May 24th, Thursday, 2007

Boycoting the 2008 Olympics

I have removed the sentence refering to a possible boycoting of the 2008 Beijin Olympics under the section "Supporters' claims" because of the following 2 reasons:
1). Both Reference provided are essentialy pointless - they are news articles on China's policies on Darfur, which of course have nothing to do with boycoting the 2008 olympics.
2). There are no "plans" currently to boycot the olympics. Some special interest groups are lobbying the different countries to boycot the game, but that is in no way justifiable as actual "plans". Since groups like those lobby all the time. Feel free to discuss this topic.

Yongke 09:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

now add this as there is a real possibilty of boycotting th eolympics.France has already said it. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_unrest_in_Tibet manchurian candidate 15:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The 2008 olympics has begun. Titor said there wouldn't be another official olympics after 2004. It's official now: John Titor was a hoax. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.190.70.143 (talk • contribs)

About waco

One way to look at Waco, is to see it as a step in the militarization of the police. There's been a lot of controversy about who shot first, and it is possible that the agents involved tried to cover up their mistakes. Also, the helicopter they used in the raid was gotten under the false pretense that the Davidians had a drug lab, while there was no mention of that on the warrant. Some have even claimed that the agents never even tried to present their warrant, and that it was a early example of a no-knock raid (the supreme court made them legal first after Waco though). Seen in this light, Waco-like incidents would be better described as paramilitary raids gone wrong. The following link has a list of botched paramilitary raids in recent history: [1]

Now according to that, there have been at least 14 failed raids yearly since 2004. Wouldn't that qualify as at least one Waco-like incident per month? I came upon that page as I was reading an article about no-knock raids ([2]), and for some reason Titor was the first thing that popped in my mind. :)

--85.157.208.100 01:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Since they are not Waco-style raids? No. There have been no raids like that of Waco since 2004, unlike what Titor claimed would be happening as of now. --Sturmwehr 22:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

A lot depends on definition of "waco type events:...Cryomaniac (talk) 11:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

But what is less up to interpretation is his statement that each would receive the same degree of media attention as Elian Gonzales. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 18:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

True, most of the events that could even be considered as vaguely similar hardly got a mention, at least not outside of conspiracy circles (i.e GLP). The main "prediction" that I find pretty prophetic was the "non-lethal weapons that turn out to be quite lethal" thing, i.e Tasers. They weren't really that well known in 2000. Cryomaniac (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

?!??!?!

These sorts of articles are a blemish on Wikipedia. They are so far along, and so apart from other articles on pseudoscientific topics, that they raise in the reader's mind doubts whether Wikipedia might be partial to the Internet youth. --VKokielov 22:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

John Titor is Thomas Pynchon.

It's true, I checked into it

I disagree. Titor is clearly an internet phenomenon, and is clearly notable. Cryomaniac (talk) 12:44, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

World still in trouble

John titor might be a hoax or he might not be, but economic and political stability is on a knife edge, the wars in the middle east are out of control, China is booming, Russia is questionable (are they friends or foe? not clear).

We are bubbling on credit, the housing market is going to sink, basically i see some similarities between now and the roaring 20's, yeah and the 1929 crash, not the same but fundamentaly looking at charts i see history repeating itself.

What happened 10 years after the crash? yeah you know it.

Perhaps thats how he guessed certain things, you can learn alot and certainly get things right from patterns even if you're not 100% accurate.

Point is people debate and people shout alot but they don't really listen because everyone has an opinion, it's all ego, i feel people pushing their damn EGO's.

They do this, then they go out and max out their credit card on another useless purchase, not realising the damage they do to everyone and themselves it's all "me me me" materialistic ego.

If you went back and told victorians about computers, going to the moon, television etc and WW2 would the believe you? some might some won't but what they will do is debate and argue and push thier own crappy little hissy ego trip, no one will actually listen, thats too hard, it's too hard to act on anything, it's too hard to learn and listen and grasp a point.

Learning to survive and at the same time not being selfish is hard, it's hard because whatever you do in life someones trying to take you on, well we need a complete change of consciousness, because this isn't good enough, history will repeat itself over and over until we finally wipe ourselves out, thats for certain, you don't need time travellers to tell you what you already know.

We make movies and storys on how we could be, but it never happens, possibly because we dont really listen to the points, instead we argue debate push ego push the "me me me, i wan't to stand out". Mel gibson did braveheart right? and the film was meant to make a point but all it ended up was about mel gibson, it was a "me me me, look at me" film he just sold himself and his ego instead of the story.

We might get somewhere if people stop doing this.

marksh82.3.84.252 05:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Book Contradiction

This:

There is a book published and for sale on Amazon. Titor claimed he had nothing to sell. Isn't this a contradiction in itself?

does not belong on the article itself. Discuss this here, not on the article.

=David^(talk)_(contribs) 01:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Undue Weight

This page seems to present a very small minority's viewpoint as a significant minority view. As the guidelines on NPOV say:

Minority views can receive attention on pages specifically devoted to them — Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. But on such pages, though a view may be spelled out in great detail, it must make appropriate reference to the majority viewpoint, and must not reflect an attempt to rewrite majority-view content strictly from the perspective of the minority view.

From Jimbo Wales, paraphrased from this post from September 2003 on the mailing list:

* If a viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate it with reference to commonly accepted reference texts; * If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents; * If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia (except perhaps in some ancillary article) regardless of whether it is true or not; and regardless of whether you can prove it or not.

Views held only by a tiny minority of people should not be represented as significant minority views, and perhaps should not be represented at all.

The page on John Titor should be exclusively descriptive of the social phenomenon and the fictitious character, not presenting it as a controversy. There is no more controversy over whether or not John Titor was real than there is over whether the earth is flat. I have flagged the article for NPOV violation. Monsday 05:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Instead of tagging, why don't you just fix it? Clip away! Maury 11:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

---

Maybe all of this belongs in time travel research as in: 18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)~ http://seattlepi.com/local/319367_timeguy12.html?source=rss

Public donates to UW scientist to fund backward-in-time research

A University of Washington scientist who could not obtain funding from traditional research agencies to test his idea that light particles act in reverse time has received more than $35,000 from folks nationwide who didn't want to see this admittedly far-fetched idea go unexplored. ............... "I'm just a crass businessman, but in business we know high risk offers high reward," he said. "This isn't that much money to find out if time can go both forward and backward." 18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)~~ This is an experiment probably coming up in July 07 to obtain further thoughts about "time". As a sidenote, another person on the TimeTravelInstitute forum is stating that she (Zeshua) is sending back quantum messages (postings once in a while) from 2025-6 via an extension of this type of quantum tunneling using a sort of future experiment that is along the same line as this experiment may prove or not prove being done by John Cramer this year.

208.193.163.220 18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC) J.J. Beat July 01, 2007

Dates Posted?

There seems to be a lack of dates as to when Titor posted, just vague years.

IMHO, the lack of a prediction of 9/11 pretty much puts to rest any of this anyway. Ttenchantr 07:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe because after WW3 some pitiful attack that killed a measly 3000 people would seem utterly irrelevant? If you went to 1930, would you be able to remember some small-scale skirmish that killed a few thousand people? :P

Considering that September 11th is now a federal holiday, due to the attacks... I kinda doubt that. StarkeRealm 03:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh my...

You'd remember the Reichstag fire wouldnt you, or if you went to 1910, you'd remember the assasination of Franz Fredinand, small events, but turning points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.155.101 (talk) 01:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

First, September 11th is not a federal holiday. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_holidays IMO, it should be. But it is not.

Second, I think John Titor would mention something that would be credited for kicking off world politics such as it has. His lack of mentioning it is certainly damning to his cause.

Why, in the hell, would he want to talk about Waco-style attacks yet leave out September 11th? If arguments that the 9/11 attacks did not produce a significant imprint on his mind, how did botched SWAT/ATF raids do so? More likely, he didn't know they were going to happen. --Sturmwehr 22:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually in the infamous faxes to Art Bell (in 1998!), the first appearance of John Titor. He talks about the world line theory and how Y2K was going to be a dissaster. The most interesting thing he says though is of the differences between his worldline: "You can alter history in the new universe that you have just created. Most of the time the changes are subtle. the oldest one was a sky scraper that don't exist in New York." Hearing this before 911, one might think of the Empire state building not being built, but Post 911 it is pretty spooky. I also found it strange how he says "a sky scrapper" and then "don't exist" like plural... 2 of the same? Twin towers? Just a thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.238.141 (talk) 17:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Accuracy

This article struck me as a bit strange not just from a Wikipedia view but on society's level too. Why has it become such a sensation to believe a man on purely circumstantial claims? Even if most of what he says turns out to be true, why would we then say this guy is telling the truth? Because western society and media needs sensation and excitement in the face of the enemy. And that's all this article is- sensationalist. If I was to tell you through this post I was from 2040 you would think I was a crackpot (or crackhead), but if I take a few blurry photos of a bent laser, and create a story based on The Terminator, K-PAX, The Butterfly Effect and Back to the Future (All great movies), suddenly I become a media phenomenon? I'm either going to be very right or very wrong with this, but c'mon guys, you can smell the bullshit through a wireless connection. Just my $0.02--Pinknoise 18:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Are you honestly surprised though? Claim anything about the govornment, no matter how crazy, then declare it's a secret being witheld from the public, and presto, someone will believe you. It's common fodder for any armchair conspiracy theorist, as can be seen right here in this page. I can't recall the exact quote, but there's something about "even the slightest shred of evidence will be accepted if it matches pre-concieved notions". Maury 22:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

How come the only records of the original posts only go back as far as late 2003? Some say this hoax was created then with fake transcript for the alleged 2000 postings of Titor. All the original sites no longer exist or have any record of Titor in the year 2000.

Honesty

The strait facts of this story are fantastic enough. There is no need to insert exagerations and false quotes. Also Titor did reference such things as the Iraq having Nukes as insinuated by Condi Rice and Directly spoken of by Dick Cheny which did turn out to be total BS. And the 2008 persidential male /female reference is paramount considering Hillary Clinton. Titor mentioned the Z machine which has already produced the world first artifical black hole which was unstable and evaporated.

Many aspects of the story are questionable. For example on the ICQ logs Titor at one point refers to the computer he must retrive as the IBM 5110 and not the 5100...personaly I chalk the slip up to what titor mentioned a few lines later about enjoying some orange wine.

Titor never said anything about bicycles being the prefered method of transportation but did suggest that people of this world line invest in bicycles for themselves as well as spare bike tires.

Titor never said the worlds gasoline supply dried up or turned scarce...I guess it could be implyed but it was never directly mentioned.

Titor mentioned cloning as an obvious upcoming medical technology.

Titor mentioned as well as needing the IBM 5100 his grand father had to "tweak" it..what the alteration could of been was never explained but it was completly left out of the latest revision of the john titor wiki page.

Alas Babylon was never mentioned and several skeptics insist that Titor lefted his story from that book as well as a GURPS role playing game.

BIGGEST OF ALL is that if you search the web archive you will find an entry for americanfederalempire.org there is no log of the mirror site which was a .net nor is there any screen shot of what the page displayed which was just one large graphic.

Let the story stand on its on words... there is no need to BS people about it weather you be a skeptic or a titorite like myself. No lies, no exagerations no false quotes or bias insinuations that those of us that believe his story are less intelligent than those that disbelieve the story or one sided skeptic slants....let both sides of the story stand on its own merits.....And dont be suprised when Hillary wins and then later enacts a draft just like titor said.

RPS A.K.A. Titorite 7-14-7

I deleted the supporters claims because they were only up to cast doubt on Titors story and make those that belive titors story look foolish. I also added titors predictions about Iraq, Hillary, and the Z machine...I knowticed too that a portion about his mission had been deleted....This page needs a massive overhaul by a netural party. Those that dont believe his story continue to arrange the page to cast doubt on the story even if they have to lie or lie by ommision.

RPS AKA titorite 7-19-7

The recent edits are so blatantly POV and unencyclopedic that they resemble vandalism. Please write in a professional manner in a neutral tone, and properly cite sources from RELIABLE secondary sources. - superβεεcat  09:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

It is neither vandilism nor POV in the edits I provide are all part of Titors story..You are omiting the edits for your reasons unclear. I even provided reference for the "z" machine http://media.www.dailylobo.com/media/storage/paper344/news/2007/02/22/Culture/Local.ManMade.Black.Holes.Could.End.The.World-2736563-page2.shtml which was also deleted. My references are reliable and if need be I can go through and cite each point with a web link...Would that be satisfactory?

Ok silence is consent I shall get to work on linking every entry I intend to provide RPS. I would sign this with the tilde thing proper but I have no idea which key I need to push for a tilde. 7-21-7

Your reference for the z machine is hardly a reliable source. The Z machine does not make black holes, it creates temperatures which exist in neutron stars and black holes, which are not the same thing, as making a black hole. See http://zpinch.sandia.gov/ (the website for the machine) or even the wiki article on it. That article you're posting is some college newspaper, and the article is totally silly. It's a complete misstatement of what was actually said: ..."That's not right” [that the z machine makes black holes] and he quickly explained where the confusion may have come from. Singer said, “When the Z Machine fires, there is a radiation pattern that it produces that is similar to that around black holes and neutron stars.”. One of the places to get the whole story on how this sillyness started is here http://www.mystrangenewmexico.com/the-columns/2007/2/22/black-holes-at-home.html.. The whole "z machine makes black holes" is a silly web forum goof espoused by people who don't bother to do their homework. Then there's this part I also removed "Titor asked the people if we belived the if IRAQ had NUKES or if we thought it was BS to whip us into a war frenzy. Condiliza Rice and Dick Cheney are on record saying Iraq had nuclear weapons, while George Bush merely said we could not wait for proof of Iraqs wmd program in the form of a mushroom cloud. To this date not WMDs have been found in Iraq.". This isn't encyclopedic, it reads like a crank conspiracy website making a case. - superβεεcat  10:45, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

John Titor's Actual Answers

This Wikipedia entry is ridiculous and full of opinion. What this needs is a time stamped listing of what John Titor was asked and his answers. This is an encyclopedia so it should not be an opinionated summary of John Titor and if he is or is not a hoax. Please stick to the facts! I will be posting an entire listing of all exchanges John Titor is confirmed to have made. If anyone has objections please raise them immediately. (Bishop205 18:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC))

Also because it has never been proven John Titor is not a time traveler if the section that says he is a hoax is "Evidence of hoaxing than the section that says he is not a hoax should not be titled Supporters claims. This would make it seem like he is a hoax. This needs to be changed to supporters evidence. Otherwise the previous section should be titled Claims of Hoaxing. This is to make this a fair view and not bias a new reader who doesn't know about John Titor.(Bishop205 19:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC))

Bishop, this is not going to fly. By adding this huge transcript, you've made the article enormous and it will take an impossibly long time to load for people on slower connections. Please see Wikipedia:Article size for this policy. The article on the US Constitution does not reprint the whole article, and the article on For Whom the Bell Tolls doesn't transcribe the whole novel; this article shouldn't have everything Titor ever wrote. Please revert your edit. A Train^talk 19:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Citing John

I agree with Bishop205 that we need to get some of John Titor's actual statements and I've put some in. I know they should be cited, but I'm not sure exactly how. The way I did it in my most recent edit was <ref>John Titor, [date] [time]</ref> but that's probably not right. Anyone care to help? Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 08:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

How and why is this article still here?

BungalowBill9 21:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)The reason why the neutrality of this article is disputed is because the article is presenting "John Titor" as a subject of controversy. In actuality, the article would be best presented as a narrative on how naive people were when initially digesting the posts that started this.

This is in no way a neutral point of view.

Moreover, the bulk of the content centers on his "predictions" and not enough on how the hoax caught on, why it did, and how it was proven thus. The fact that this article is classified as "within the scope of biography" as well as "hoax" is another example of how Wikipedia's reputation unfortunately is hurt by material such as this.

There are certainly more users here reading this who are MUCH more technically proficient than I am. Do us all a favor and clip this article, clean it up and edit it until it reflects what it should! The fact it is even in an encyclopedia is suspect.

BungalowBill9 21:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Olympics and civil unrest

I thought I'd start a discussion on this so we don't keep edit warring about it. Here's my take

1. John Titor was asked: "Are the Olympics still being played in your time?" and he replied "As a result of the many conflicts, no, there were no official Olympics after 2004. However, it appears they may be revived in in 2040." The statement that John "could have" meant the summer olympics is not met up with John's sole statement on the matter and is such wild speculation that I doubt any source that claims this could be credible. However, I would find it more acceptible if it were worded "supporters have argued that he could have meant the summer olympics (source) although..." with the although explaining the problem with that argument. Recently, I've taken out statements that "olympics" can mean just "summer olympics" with this as proof (I think) but that is not evidence for the statement. Either way, it needs a good source if it's gonna be in there at all.
2. Has anybody heard of any "waco-type event"? I haven't heard of any, and certainly not one a month. And while it's possible that there have been such events that have been covered up, John also said that the coverage of these events would be similar to that of "Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elian Gonzalez." and further defines war in this context as "organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict." It's just not there, folks.

Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 18:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Agree completely. These predictions have obviously been demonstrated wrong beyond any reasonable doubt. All else is post-facto reasoning, the very definition of POV. It must be cut out on sight, it's official policy. Maury 18:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not that John "could have" only referred to the Summer Olympics. he probably did. Every person on Earth uses the word "Olympics" to refer to the Summer olympics, and not the winter olympics. Secondly, he said that we wouldn't notice it until 2008 when "something happens to change [our] lives" and "it's all on everyone's doorstep", so in my opinion he has not been proved wrong yet. ChaosSorcerer91 15:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Sweeping statements like "every person on Earth" are generally blatantly false. In this case, you're contradicted by Wikipedia's article on Olympic Games as well as the American Heritage Dictionary, the latter of which outlines general usage. As for your second point, you are also wrong as 2008 was predicted to be at "everyone's doorstep" and a point when we will all know there's no turning back. He never said we "wouldn't notice it" until 2008. It's hard not to notice a civil war. You're entitled to your opinion, even when it contradicts actual facts, but the moment you click the edit button on an article, you are not entitled to represent your opinion sans proper sourcing. This edit violates WP:UNDUE and WP:WEASEL and this edit violates WP:V. So stop. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Exactly how to do those edits violate anything? I thought they were perfectly just edits. --ChaosSorcerer91 19:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how to say this without sounding patronizing. You've been here for almost two years but if you believe that your edits are "perfectly just" then you need to reread all major Wikipedia policies (except maybe the ones about being civil, you seem to be a respectful fellow), especially the ones that I've linked. You can't put in your own analysis, you can't put in your own opinion, and you can't put in your own viewpoint without sourcing, especially if people are disagreeing with you. If you'd like me to pick your particular edit apart so you can get an idea of how to improve your judgement on neutrality, verifiability, and citation, say the word. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 03:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Well that's just the thing really. You say that it is against the rules to put in your own opinion. Especially if people disagree with you. And that is correct. But the thing is, the whole of this article is opinion. The thing about the John Titor case is that 100% of it is opinion. No one can say for fact exactly what he meant by what he said. No one can say that he can be proved wrong. You say that I was not being neutral. The article is far from neutral at the moment! I was helping to make it neutral!

But right now this entire article, desspite being entirely one opinion, is written as fact. It is not fact, and I don't like the way that the article is written to make out that it is fact, that's all.

As article based on a case that is entirely opinion (such as this one is) should explain all opinions (as this one does not). Saying that, for example to quote from the article "so far all of Titor's predictions have turned out not to be true", is against Wikipedia guidelines. The very same Wikipedia guidelines you have just instructed me to read. Why? Because it is opinion. Also, the first sentence in the article. "He describes a dystopian future". Personally, I don't think he described a dystopian future at all. I saw it closer to a utopia.

The whole thing about the Olympics. I can't help if the Olympics article says differently, but I decided to put this to the test when I went into town the other day. Whilst I was there, I asked I think about a dozen people "How often are the Olympics", and "When are the next two Olympics". Pretty much everyone said "Every four years" and "In 2008 and 2012". I think one person said "Every two years", and one person said "Every four years, but it depends whether you mean Winter or Summer".

After that, I asked "What about the Winter Olympics". Obviously only to the people who did not take into account the Winter Olympics. The majority of people said something along the lines of "Winter Olympics doesn't count" or "I don't count Winter Olympics". One person even didn't know there WAS a Winter olympics! Seriously, I'm not lying here. That is genuine research I have done for Wikipedia, and now I can confidently say as 100% fact that the majority of people do not include Winter Olympics when using the term "Olympics". Of course you are entitled to your own opinion, even when it contradicts actual fact.

Now I'm not saying I'm right here. I'm not saying I'm wrong. I'm just saying that right now this Wikipedia article is based on a very 1-sided opinion, and I think the article should be re-written to IN DETAIL examine all opinion. For example, the civil war thing. John Titor DID say we would not notice the civil war really until 2008. You say it's hard not to notice a civil war, but did he ever say the civil war would involve fighting? Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, and I'm not saying you're right, but there are plenty of events going on in America today that could be interpreted by some as being a civil war. And whenever I turn on the news I see a waco type event happening. How can you possibly say that it is "just not there folks"?

I'm not going to rewrite it myself because it would be reverted by people who can't separate fact from opinion. Sorry if I'm sounding offensive to anyone, I don't mean to, it just makes me angry how I get yelled at for putting my opinion in an article which is already 100% opinion.

Here's a fact: 83% of information on Wikipedia is wrong - FACT. --ChaosSorcerer91 14:56, 1 September 2007 (GMT)

It seems like your reading comprehension is low.

I didn't say it's against the rules to put in your own opinion. It's against the rules to put in your own opinion without sourcing.

You can never do "research for wikipedia" because that violates our policy against doing just that. (and nobody but the people living in your town would call what you've done valid research)

John Titor did say there would be fighting. You say you see them on the news, I'm curious as to what you would constitute an example of a "Waco style event".

When you say that this article is one-sided and only reflects one opinion, you have to consider what is reasonable and what is supported. That this is a hoax and that these predictions have failed is the reasonable and supported position. That someone really came back from the future and posted on the internet making predictions and that these predictions have started to come true even though we can't really tell is an unreasonable position and unsupported. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not twisting interpretations.

As for "dystopian," I think you're right in questioning it. I might even change that right now.

And don't throw statistics out like 100% opinion and 83% wrong. Don't you know that 78.8% of statistics are made up on the spot? Calling your "research" genuine doesn't make it so and putting "fact" by a statement doesn't make it a fact. You have to verify your statements. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 19:28, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

First of all, you can't source opinions. Secondly, you're right, I wouldn't call what I did research, but i think it is proof that Olympics is used by most to mean just "Summer Olympics".

John Titor did say there would be fighting and that you would see it on the news. I don't know about you, but when I turn on the news I see fighting and people dying in battle everyday. Yes, that this is a hoax and that predicions have failed is reasonable and supported, but also that he was telling the truth and that his predictions are coming true is a supported and reasonable opinion. The fact is, he was very loose with his statements, and so far there is no proof either way that he was lying or not. We won't know until 2015 rolls around whether he was lying or not, because World War III is really the only part of the whole war thing that he stated SPECIFIC FACTS about. Therefore I think that this article at the moment is one-sided. Maybe we should put a neutrality notice on the article, just so people will know that this discussion is being had.

Oh, and thanks for agreeing with me on the dystopian thing. --ChaosSorcerer91 15:30, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

1. Yes, you can source opinions.

2. The problem is that you did call it research ("that is genuine research I have done for Wikipedia") and it doesn't prove didly squat except that you know a dozen people who share your opinion who unsurprisingly live in your same town.

3. John Titor said there would be fighting in the American civil war. The fighting you're talking about is in Iraq.

4. Don't put a neutrality notice. We've already addressed the issue and you obviously have no intention of finding and citing any sources for what you'd like the article to reflect and I've already discredited your position. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Reasons

It was mentioned the naive people who read the original posts. Only one forum would have had the posts remain and one thread was found to be corrupted later, to even begin this. The other forum was started up after the Art Bell forum was taken down and ended with some people wishing to discuss this possibility of a person claiming to be a self-proclaimed time traveller. If anything, the forum where the Art Bell posts were copied to in threads was the intent of disproving his claims and also to "Avoid" this type of future. And as such, being one of the original posters along with others, we all retain (as far at least that I am concerned) that "Avoiding" this future is the prime reason and the only reason that these threads were only presented first for discussion. What some other people then who saw these postings or the forum where it was presented deferred to inject their own musings about this self-proclaimed supposed time traveller and what they did with what they intended is best left up to them to tell anyone. "Avoiding this Kind of Future" may well be their intentions also, but it definitely was only put up in the first place to discuss and not so many people were discussing it (along with it going to other forums by some others) but then.......................there also seems to be a lot of nonsense in the world today as it exists in my own opinion anyway. So, first I would include that this page on this self-proclaimed supposed time traveller should also contain the message that other people do not wish or pray for this kind of future on anyone in this World. The end result is that the future retains its state of being open-ended, instead of diving into a black hole with only one possibility left. But then again this world.......................may involve too much discussion on whether JT is right or wrong, and narrow focusing on JT instead of the entire process of what is going on in this world and attempting to change it for the better. Yes, there are UFO cases of this sort also and one is this link also (other links can be found): http://brumac.8k.com/trent2.html By the way MUFON this last weekend had a scuplture build a model of this UO at the symposium in Denver this August 10-12 weekend of 2007. So, consider it is like a "Space UFO case" but instead a "Time UFO" type of case if you would. As much as anyone can say about the Trents Photos from May 11, 1950, it is a UO, but can be inferred to be a UFO case especially if viewing the 40X blowups of the object in the picture from the BlueBook photos given there: http://ufologie.net/htm/bluepicstrent.htm In other words, we only have the photos and Titor's word that he is also from a paralle universe and a "Time UFO" in a manner of speaking the same as the McMinnville photos (Trents) links up above.

Thanks for your time, JJBeat 22:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)J.J.Beat August 14, 2007JJBeat 22:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC) (if I did that correctly) G'day!

I'm sorry, what are you getting at? UFOs have nothing to do with this article. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 22:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I just went and did it

We've all been talking about it, but little ended up happing. Finally I got fed up, and tried my best.

First off, the intro now talks about the phenominon of the Titor story. I think everyone will agree that's worth talking about, at a minimum.

I also removed the predictions list entirely. It's a short version of material that is widely available, and is better collected, more complete, and better presented elsewhere. Links to that material already exists.

I have tried to collect the material from the postings into some sort of order; a discussion of his role, the machine, and other predictions.

I have also collected up the criticisms and removed the POV "answers". All we have is the posts, reading between the lines is not acceptable.

Hope it's at least a start... let me know!

Maury 21:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Bold moves. I can get behind what you've done, I think, although I'll go through with some copyediting. You don't need to put "scary quotes" around John Titor's name since it puts unreasonable emphasis that this is a false name. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 22:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! And point well taken on the "scary quotes" (which I just used, it seems...) Maury 00:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Changed a little the John Titor page to reflect the chronological events and thread corruptions that happened, but unable right now to think of the original name of the Time Travel Institute Forums (which on the first page show that "John Titor was Here" Nov.2, 2000 there, but the original name of the website was something like XZone.Net or something like that so until I find out, original Archive's WebCrawler's pages of the original threads can not be looked up because that name I gave above is wrong, and all I am sure of right now is that it had a "X" in the title of it. Sorry if I messed anything up, but the reason for the copy of the threads is because the original threads were corrupt as mentioned and the name of the website was changed and the hard disk on that forum's computer failed. I can look up perhaps the thread where that was discussed, but that be about page 120 or so now. If I find anything actually of which I really do not have the time to find but still may, I will let you know. I would probably have to ask another one of the original posters and many do not want to talk about it that much anymore. I may have it on a CD copy of things I had on my computer, but that was a couple of computers ago, so again if I find anything I will post it. Those are the events as stated by original posters on what really happened to the original threads there at now the Time Travel Institute Forum. Plus a lot of people seem to get upset over what he posted, and perhaps try and change what is happening now in the world. I still find that it seems on this page about John Titor still somewhat. I just left the rest of it, as of now because there were variations in his story from the one original website to the other original website mentioned. If there was anywhere else that this self-proclaimed time traveller posted then I am not sure and I would not begin to know except for the IRC chat found probably by Darby over at Anomalies.net being that they are original posters as well.

21:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)~ JJBeat21:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC) August 21, 2007. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.193.163.231 (talk)

Found the name, and a robots.txt file denies access to original forum threads.

About previous name of Time Travel Institute: Robots.txt Query Exclusion One of the threads was mentioned in link on Titor's page "time travel paradoxes" http://www.xone.net/tti/board/ubbhtml/Forum1/HTML/000367.html

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.xone.net/tti/board/ubbhtml/Forum1/HTML/000367.html

Site's robot.txt

User-agent: * Disallow: /

Not allowed to be looked at from the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. JJBeat 22:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)JJBeatJJBeat 22:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC) August 21, 2007

Any idea why they did this? Maury 20:08, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Jericho

Doesn't the "5 presidents" idea after an apocalyptic attack sound a lot like the storyline from TV series Jericho? -- Thoreaulylazy 13:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

• The story of John Titor predates Jericho. So, if anything, the storyline for Jericho sounds a lot like John Titor's 5 Presidents idea, not the other way around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.225.129.111 (talk) 17:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh please!

The article says:

"In May 2007, Seattle-based dentist and time travel expert Dr. Bruce Goldberg, on Coast to Coast AM, brought up that Titor never tipped the world off regarding September 11, 2001."

You gotta be kidding... With all due respect to the said dental and time-travel expert (BTW, does that imply expertise in actual time-travelling or... what? Really: I want to know), he certainly wasn't the first or the second, or - as it is safe to assume, even based on my own limited individual experience - the hundredth person to have thought and spoken about that glaring omission.

Unless someone has compelling evidence against this subject having been discussed - publicly - long before "May 2007", I propose this reformulation of the said statement:

"It has <also> been brought to the public attention that Titor never alerted the world about September 11, 2001" (or something to that effect). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.142.146.158 (talk • contribs)

Wording it the way you've put would make it statement with no attribution. I agree that Larry Haber isn't a credible source, but in this instance it's more about the idea than the person-as-expert. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 21:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

The fact that John Titor didn't mention 9/11 (and really, all of his failed predictions) could easily be attributed to the alternate timeline theory. I find it very odd that this isn't mentioned in the Wiki entry about him. --Celtic Jobber (talk) 09:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

That's because it's original research. We've got enough of that already. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 18:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The family name

So, this guy is now nine years old, right? Are there very many Titors living in the US of A - or anywhere else, for that matter?

Or, if he changed the name: did he offer any indication as to why this rather extraordinary choice of name?

(As you can guess, I am really not very much into this story... But I do know a ridiculous claim - see the above - when I see one.)

No offense, anyone.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.142.146.158 (talk • contribs)

As far as I know, the answer to both questions is no. I get the feeling like Titor expected us to understand it wasn't his real name. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 21:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

No Paradox

It is actually possible we are living in a parallel world to his, and the war will not happend at all because of small differences.--80.251.195.1 09:54, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Discuss`?

It is actually quite possible that the guy didn't travel through time -- discuss Truce m3 00:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

This is not a discussion forum on the topic itself. Discussions should be primarily about the article and sources. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 01:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

---

/* Further Links about Black Holes and Postings of JT *? I will just give this, because there are other things to do. Some links to News articles and postings:

"Telling you about impending place crashes or other disasters (provided I could give you exact dates and times) may save lives at one point but cause cascading changes that take others at a later point." John Titor (about 911?) "The singularities do not create Tipler cylinders they create the same physical environment without all the mass. The same math works for both. There are two singularities. Their mass and spin is altered in order to adjust the size of the ergosphere and cause the event horizons to interact and create the gravity sinusoid. I have a basic home schooling education (k-12) and a bachelor’s degree in history." John Titor 02-12-2001 08.54PM "HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS = ARTIFICIAL MICROSINGULARITY When I first started posting online a few months ago, I said that major breakthroughs in particle physics were around your corner. Soon, CERN will bring their big machine on line and they will be smashing very fast and high-energy particles together. One of the more odd and potentially dangerous items produced from this incease in energy will be microsingularities a fraction of the size of an electron. (for those who would like to follow the developments at CERN) http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/Welcome.html" John Titor 02-15-2001 12:07 P M

Prediction by Titor?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3913145.stm

Hawking would change the way he thought about black holes. (did not find exact posting of JT) Thursday, 22 July 2004 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3897989.stm Thursday, 15 July, 2004

Not really an important link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2001/glasgow_2001/1527293.stm

Time: Dr. Michio Kaku http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/time4.shtml

Within extreme places in space, like black holes, time is squeezed to such an extent that, to an observer, it seems to stand still. Time is more variable that it could ever have been thought possible. It can even, theoretically, move backwards. This leads to one of the most extraordinary possibilities - a time machine. (my opinion - usually Dr. Kaku is talking about big black holes - like Universe Black Holes)

Lab fireball 'may be black hole' http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4357613.stm

Thurday March 15, 2005

Parallel universes exist - study http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=paUniverse_sun14_parallel_universes&show_article=1&cat=0

Sept 23, 2007 The Oxford team, led by Dr David Deutsch, showed mathematically that the bush-like branching structure created by the universe splitting into parallel versions of itself can explain the probabilistic nature of quantum outcomes. © Copyright Press Association Ltd 2007, All Rights Reserved.

http://www.anomalies.net/object/titororiginalpost.html http://www.anomalies.net/page/time_travel

What day is it now? That is about it, but there could be more, I just do not know, exactly. Friday December 07, 2007 Oops! JJBeat (talk) 22:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC) JJBeat Dec.11, 2007 (to correct leaving out who posted.) Oops~!

P.S. Dr. Robert Brown Replies to Darby RE. Titor http://communities.anomalies.net/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/13443#Post13443

09/10/2003 12:42AM

JJBeat (talk) 23:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)JJBeat December 11, 2007 (forum changes sometimes when archived or redone=rearranged.) Added link to thread again in External Links on Titor's Page Dec.11, 2007 Dr.Robert Brown I am guessing or thinking is a Condensed Matter Physicist who teaches Special Relativity at Duke University in Graduate Physics College there. JJBeat (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)JJBeat December 11, 2007.

Bad editing

I suggest listing down predictions year by year so that everyone can read his predictions easily, like this:

1987 black monday
1995 internet boom
2000 internet bubble
2001 911
2003 Iraq —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.98.211 (talk) 17:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

There aren't really enough predictions, especially enough dated predictions, to make that worthwhile. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 18:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

---

Two other pages of the original Art Bell's BBS forum thread "I am from 2036" thread of JT was found via looking at 185 pages of links at the Internet Archive. Page 6 of the original thread and page 42. Page 42 is not all that important and is kind of a break page of sorts in the thread.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010410033701/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?postid=35706 Page 42

http://web.archive.org/web/20010413023843/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?postid=18566 Page 6

and there those two pages are. Page 6 though is alright. 208.193.163.210 (talk) 04:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)JJ. Beat Dec.28, 2007

---

Other set of pictures originally. Early original pictures shown by John Titor shown at first at other websites that no longer exist. Copied by original posters from Art Bell's BBS forum by memebers when BBS forum existed.

http://www.anomalies.net/object/johntitor.html These are verified by the original posters, and also the reason the posters asked for better pictures when at the Art Bell's BBS forum. Since Art Bell's website back then put on the Copyright on that Archive page, and the pictures do not seem to show anymore, these pictures from John Titor are copies of the first pictures shown by John Titor. Also copied theads are there from the original Time Travel Institute website then named xone.net. when looking at the Time Travel link up on top at the website. As to why you can not view the original threads from xone.net which is now The Time Travel Institute -- at the time perhaps it is just that the name of the website changed and all the threads at that website still existed at that time, and later they became corrupted there as explained on the John Titor page here at Wikipedia. As to anything else, perhaps it is just Terms of Service when doing business having a forum up in the first place from the service provider. Otherwise I do not really know. That is between the person who has the forum and the service provider, none of which I am. Just a person there at the time on the forum and a poster originally like some of the others at Anomalies.net started up afterwards. Any other questions I really do not have answers for either. Except what John Titor stated about how the pictures were copied at a copying machine in a copy place and the rest of the pictures showing the unit taken (according to Titor) with his dad's polaroid camera. Except if you believe the picture taken from the year 2035 is a taken by a camera from the future or whatever it is taken with since it is suppose to be from 2035. (?) I do not know, and do not pretend to know, only can guess! JJBeat (talk) 18:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)JJBeat January 04, 2008.

---

Perhaps clearing up some things. When other websites that contained the original pictures went down or were not shown, since the pictures were moved around, and are not listed in the Internet Archive Website, this page of the Internet Archive's original forum page, contains an original link of the Anomalies.net webpage that shows the pictures as the Anomalies.net website as it was back in 2001 when the website was put up showing the original pictures from John Titor. (I have nothing to do with it, or any forum or any other place mentioned. http://web.archive.org/web/20010410033701/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?postid=35706 Page 42

That Internet Archive page has the link on it, and the link to the other Internet Archive page still works and shows the same pictures as the current Anomalies.net page listed in the External Links article section. The poster is Rick on the page who stated the weblink and also the person at the current Anomalies.net. Either one I suppose could be used, since well, how should I put it, there are other References in the Reference section that to me really are not References. What does Rick do for a job? He works for the Government, and works on the Missile Defence System, as far as I know, but was also listed on one of the original pages of the original threads. In other words, he is an original poster who was or still is working for the Government at the time of the original posts. I would not ask him questions about what he does for a living, you probably would be visited or told outright, that it is Classified Information. (I really do not know, for I really do not need to know, I do not have Official Clearance about any of it, and it is just my opinion - that Rick does have Official Clearance from the Government for Classified Projects of the Federal Government.) Those pictures from the original Anomalies.net website do show in the Internet Archive. I have nothing to do with any forum or anything else about any of John Titor, except to be looking up the info I listed as listed by the Internet Archive. I have nothing to do with any website link given on the article page. I have no website, nor anything else to do with it, except being an original poster when John Titor was here at the time the original postings from John Titor were made at the two forum websites - Art Bell and Time Travel Institute. Ask me anything else, and I do not know the answer. 208.193.163.47 (talk) 20:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)JJBeat January 11, 2007. Anything else can be looked up from scientists who posts articles on the Internet, or from http://arxiv.org/ which is one of the websites where real science papers are located or from websites of real places doing the research - whatever they are doing. I would not know that either. Thought I clear that up. I do not know anything except what is found on the Internet, but a little about computer programming. That is my college degree. There is nothing being sold, just info, as far as I know, at Anomalies.net. Just listing what is known and found out by their Researchers into John Titor. 208.193.163.47 (talk) 20:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)JJBeat January 11, 2007.

Ethan Jensen

Hey: who is Ethan Jensen... also called Ethan Titor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.126.116.110 (talk) 00:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC) 200.126.116.110 (talk) 00:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC) Mark.

---

All the pictures were provided by TimeTravel_0 (John Titor). Also he stated when the picture was taken and what the picture is about, and that he probably should not show us (the rest of the posters) that picture stated to be from the year = 2035 about the laser picture, but included it anyway. (That is stated in the text on the Art Bell's picture link website and also somewhere in one of the threads, ah I think.) What anyone else thinks of the picture well? I did take some theoretical physics courses when I was younger (actually along with Engineering but never Graduated at that time) and do not intend to go through all the various opinions by any MIT, Yale, Stanford, or Princeton University scientists or engineers, or physicists about the theories of time travelling. They sell books about any of that and whatever has been brought up by them including Prof. Mallet also. But not to scare anyone, because there is enough going on in this world, I do have a general idea about maybe how (without all the headaches and just a general idea anyway) this unit could perhaps work. I also do not know enough to actually say that for sure, with any reasonable explanation. So there I will leave it, including editing the "Article" page because it all got involved while he was posting and perhaps to some it still is involved. I prefer not to raise emotional feelings or anything else about whether the future will end up this way or that way. I myself just prefer it not to end up like he stated, but to me the world wants to condemn its self in a sense in my own opinion. I have like anyone else my own problems so whomever wants to state the "Article" any better can have at it. I am not going to convince anyone either about any of it or try to, or sell it or buy it either. 208.193.163.21 (talk) 18:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)JJBeat January 13th, 2008. I rather be thinking about something else though! Thanks for your time then! 208.193.163.21 (talk) 18:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)JJBeat January 13th, 2008.

Problems with the technology

"Image of the laser pointer's beam" is brought up, without proper explanation. I assume it's a photograph provided by Titor, but this needs some clarification. OttoMäkelä (talk) 00:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

It was one, removed for some reason, though how does a time traveler from the future hold copyright in this time period? it was this really crappy and easily falsible picture, he probably woulda made better by not posting a picture. Ask the admins about it.--Cody6 (talk) 05:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Another point that apparently never dawned on anyone was why in the world would he just happen to have this photograph on him personally, unless it was to "prove" he was a time traveler? I can see it now: "well, back to 1970's I go....let's see...what shall I take with me...how about I drag along this picture of my instructor bending a laser beam during my training..." Yeah, right... ~~Justtalk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.197.217.20 (talk) 15:31, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It was a photo which supposedly showed the beam of a red laser pointer being bent by the intense gravity just outside the time machine. The beam was supposedly visible because of his instructor's cigar smoke. I always wondered why a gravitational field strong enough to bend light would fail to also pull all of the smoke particles out of the air. 24.209.110.27 (talk) 21:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but again why would he just happen to have this particular photo on him, if he was a real time traveler? Why would you carry a picture like that on you? From the hoax stand point, it makes PERFECT sense: to "prove" that the claims he was making were legit.~~Justtalk

Song about John Titor

Well, while anyone is commenting on this John Titor Story, I decided to show the link to my song, which is written by me. Really. Other original posters can verify this. As long as it is up, I guess, although there may be others also. Not the greatest, by any means. Link added to External links if permitted. JJBeat (talk) 21:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC) JJBeat JJBeat (talk) 21:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC) January 23, 2008

Can verify what? That it's a song? That you wrote it? That its lyrics are accurate? This strikes me as a conflict of interest at best, and blatant self promotion at worst. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 21:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The song is free, and it is not self-promotion. (at least to me.) Done on home equipment at -10dB which is nothing like professional equipment at +4dB standard. I am not a professional, just an amateur. The song will never be for sell, although it was used for a college project by another person who asked and used it for free. (I do not even know that for sure though.) Although if anyone using the song to make money, then I am sure you will see who wrote it on the Properties Page of the song if anyone downloads it anyway, and how the website where it is at, along with another 110, some thousands songs checks on that kind of copyright stuff first before it is even put up on that website. There was another song by someone in Australia I think briefly maybe played on some radio station a couple of years ago. Don't know the person though, and I donot remember his name. I am sure at that website there may be a musical artist that does sell songs though and even has their own website, none of which I have. Also I am not promoting anything at that website listed. The Wikipedia article about John Titor is I think or am guessing mainly about the phenomenum about what this self-proclaimed time traveller mentioned and the Internet and all the websites somewhat of where he is mentioned either perhaps in forums or by any other form of entertainment. I promote actually nothing, especially myself, but I did mention that in the first place here and if writing music for sell, then it sure would probably not be about John Titor. The song to me is about what John Titor stated, and has nothing to do with what I think, one way or another about John Titor. But whatever? (as I mentioned in the first place. Now my other song about John Titor goes to the tune somewhat of "Grandma Got Ran Over by a Reindeer" Christmas song and the words are different to reflect how a supposed time traveller gets ran over when he appears in a different time by a bear. How an Eagle landed on his smashed craft and looked around and defecated when starting to fly again, and how the time traveller never makes it back to his time ever again. The supposed time traveller would have to be an animal trainer and join a circus travelling around the world in the end. That song would also be free to download if ever completed.

JJBeat (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)JJBeatJJBeat (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC) January 26, 2008.

The concern isn't that it's commercial, it's that it's not actually notable. It's self promotion because you're putting it on Wikipedia despite its actual non-notability. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 23:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Fine then. The people already got it a long time ago that wanted it. http://dimensionalcitizen.tripod.com/StoryJT.html (and a better copy of it.)And Dr. Bruce Goldberg is a dentist originally. The article does not present a neutral point of view in my opinion.

JJBeat (talk) 02:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)JJBeatJJBeat (talk) January 26, 2008.

It's strange. The Bruce Goldberg thing has the feel of providing a source for an idea (something this article has a scarcity of) but he's not necessarily a reputable expert on any subject. C2CAM is the most prominant forum from which Titor is discussed, so perhaps we could just say that he's a guest. Or we could remove the whole thing since it's been uncited for long enough. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 02:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Reference to WMDs and War in Iraq

"None of the things I have said will be a surprise. They were set in motion ten, twenty, even thirty years ago. 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?" Why is this quote not included in the article? It is one of the significant proofs that Titor knew something, BECAUSE IT CAME TO PASS!!! He said that when he made one of his posts. In fact, you can find it here: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/john_titor_archive_page15.html --24.188.136.219 (talk) 10:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Is that a credible source though?--Cody6 (talk) 17:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Are you serious? First of all, it contains a collection of all the posts ever made by Titor. Second of all, you could find this post on all other Titor websites that archived his posts. Here is the main website and you can find the same comment over there in the archives. http://www.johntitor.com/ Go to February 2001 archive and you'll find it there. --24.188.136.219 (talk) 09:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Titor was, ironically, using that as an example of something which is obvious before it comes to pass. --JGGardiner (talk) 10:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't quite understand what you mean. Do you support putting that quote in the article?--24.188.136.219 (talk) 10:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you need to find a source that argues that this is a prediction and say that people interpret it as being fulfilled. Considering that in 2000 that the most recent military operation taken by the United States was in Iraq over non-compliance with UN disarmament procedures, it's not a big logical leap. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 22:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

That is what I meant. But there are also many ways it could be read. Given the context, Titor may have been suggesting that Iraq had nukes, which was apparently wrong. He was talking about long foreshadowing. What was long foreshadowed about the Gulf War II? He doesn't say, making it a vague prediction if you read it about the war. But I doubt it was because then the last line has no connection to the rest of his answer and the question he was responding to. Either way, it is only "proof" if you read it a certain way and that is original research. --JGGardiner (talk) 21:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Even so, it would be a textbook example of selection bias. There are many notable things that Titor failed to predict, and some things that he predicted that have not come to pass.

And on top of that some predictions are so easy to make, you can’t really take them as evidence of time travel. For instance, if I told you that Fidel Castro is going to die sometime in the next five years – come on, the guy is more than 80 years old and his health is already failing him. I think WMD in Iraq is just such a prediction. — NRen2k5, 17:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

"None of the things I have said will be a surprise. They were set in motion ten, twenty, even thirty years ago. 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?"

This quote should be in the article. He said it and it has been often quoted. The question remains, however, whether or not it is a "hit" or a "miss" as a prediction. Though I don't know whether or not it was made intentionally vague, as many of his predictions were, it is on close inspection in fact vague. People who support the quote as a "hit" read the statement in a way that supports their belief that he said no nukes would be found in Iraq. But the same statement can be logically read to mean exactly the opposite; that nukes would be found. "Are you really [actually] surprised to find out that Iraq has nukes now? Or is that [your "surprise"] just BS to whip everyone {else] into accepting the next war?"" I understand that as I've rewritten the sentences by parsing it in the way that I did may not be what he intended. But it is a logical interpretation of the sentence based on the full context. He initially said, "None of the things I have said will be a surprise" and then asked if anyone was really surprised at finding nukes in Iraq.

What the people who view this sentence as a "hit" fail to do is cross check Titor on the subject. The above 25-FEB-2001 Iraq post was made on the "I am from 2036" thread on Art Bell's BBS Post-2-Post. Contrast the quote with what he said on 30-DEC-2000 on the "Time Travel Paradoxes" thread on Time Travel Institute:

"I apologize for wasting this much space but I thought some of you would be interested in seeing this after reading some of things I've been saying in the last few months. Below is the address to the news site and a copy of the text.

[TimeTravel_0 now quotes from a news article reporting on a CIA study]

In addition to confronting the growing economic and military power of China and India and the continuing decline of Russia, the CIA says: "Between now and 2015 terrorist tactics will become increasingly sophisticated and designed to achieve mass casualties."

In particular it notes the growing threat of biological and chemical weapons and "suitcase" nuclear devices against the United States. In addition, it expects rogue states such as Iraq and Iran to develop long range missiles in the near future.

Iran, it says, could be testing such weapons by as early as the coming year, and cruise missiles by 2004. Iraq could have missiles capable of hitting America by 2015, with both nations developing nuclear, chemical and biological warheads."

We now have a context in which to place the February statement. What he's 'been saying for the past few months" he encapsulates in the CIA study repoting that Iraq is developing nuclear capabilities. It would appear that he expected nukes to be found in Iraq. 68.108.248.192 (talk) 06:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

The reference section needs to be reviewed....

and some of them are incomplete entries —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.62.138.94 (talk) 08:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Someone delete this garbage

Honestly, this just looks like an uncyclopedia page to me. I can't believe people actually swallow this garbage, that's how rubbish this whole article is. Please remove this article as it acts as an advertisement for this lunacy. And people wonder why morons believe in a religion created by a Science fiction writer... This dogshit nonsense doesn't belong on Wikipedia. (JackorKnave 14/03/2008) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.196.36 (talk • contribs)

I've removed most of your comments here as they were more uncivil than helpful. See our policy on civility. If you feel this article is too biased towards believing the Titor story then that's something we can work on; show us where we can fix this. But that Jon Titor was a fraud is not reason enough to delete the article. Our criterion for inclusion is Notability. There is a deletion process if you feel it's important enough, though it requires community consensus and I doubt you'll get that. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I can't beleive this. Someone (clearly) types up a pile of bullshit on the internet, and he gets a whole wikipedia page to himself? Where's the logic in that? Fine. Leave the article there. It's just another reason that proves how outright stupid people are, in believing this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.43.178.150 (talk) 12:07, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

No, someone types up a pile of bullshit on the internet, people believe him, they talk about him on coast 2 coast AM, and references to him appear in various other outlets. If he wasn't a popular phenomenon amongst people who will believe just about anything, he wouldn't be notable. But he is, so he is.— Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 19:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Well known, citable hoaxes, myths, scams, unverifiable theories, etc. are considered encyclopedic, see also Loch Ness Monster, Baba Yaga, Piltdown Man, God, Teleportation, etc. --NEMT (talk) 02:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Superverse and the future

Assuming that the claimant did travel into the past and spoke the truth, it can therefore be believed that the many-worlds interpretation is correct. However, believing that this is correct, the present is being split into multiple futures. Therefore, while the future predicted by the claimant will be true in at least one universe, it can be false in the rest of the universes including the one we presently find ourselves in. Thus, even if the claimant was speaking the truth, it is very likely that the future he predicted is not the future we find ourselves in. Because of this, the claimant's predictive failures do not by themselves falsify him unless those predictions are about physical laws. As such, there is no value in any predictions made by the claimant, because they were applicable to his universe - as distinct from our universe after 2001.

To understand it another way, consider a tree with two-way splits. For a node at level nine, it is known which nodes at levels six through eight led to that node. However, knowing that node at level six, it is not possible to predict which node on level nine one will end up with, as a result of random events.

--AB (talk) 03:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sure.....so in other words, if any of his guesses come true, then that mean his claims were legit. However, since all of his so-called predictions have failed, you just say it is because he is in another world-line. So either way, he's correct. Gee, how convenient. It is sad how gullible people are. John Titor was a hoax, deal with it. ~~justtalk

No, that's not what I said at all, and I certainly don't think that Titor was real. All I'm saying is that if the many-worlds interpretation is correct, there is no value whatsoever to any such future predictor of the future. Even in (and especially in) the remote chance that Titor was speaking the truth, he sowed the seeds of his own irrelevancy back in 2001 itself, which is at least a little ironic. --AB (talk) 03:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I hear what you are saying, but Titor also claimed that there was only a 2% variance between "his world line" and ours. And yet all of his "predictions" have failed. Verdict: hoax. ~~justtalk

New Information regarding CERN and Titor claims

PLEASE SEARCH THE NEXT LINE BELOW VIA AOL OR GOOGLE TO FIND THE ARTICLE!!

Critics Fear This Could Destroy Earth Experts Set to Turn on the Switch

Titor said that in 2001 CERN would activate a device that could potentially create small black holes. The reason I am adding this is because in August of 2008 CERN will be activating a Particle Accelerator and just one of the concerns are the creation of mini black holes among other things. I believe this is pertinent because Titor said in 2001 something similiar would happen that would enable us to figure out time travel. It is now 2008 and this Particle Accelerator will be activated. I definately recommend the article above for reading. I found it on the aol new section. Above is the title of the article. If you just search by above three line title, you should find it. It's worth a read if you are interested in the possibility of this occuring when the CERN project is activated. My apologies for not being able to get the external link to appear properly. I'm quite sure that if you search AOL or Google you should definately be able to find it. Please contact me via my talk page for discussion. I am very interested in hearing what people have to say on the subject. --Drunknesmonsta (talk) 05:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Is Huge Experiment Worth the Risk? ms

What you're advocating is technically Original Research as it is novel synthesis. What we need to find is advocates pointing to this news item as a potential fulfillment of Titor's words. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 07:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

"New CJD Type"

[3] This, + CERN, + a quote I read here suggesting the twin towers were never built in Titor's timeline is starting to creep me out... Qoou.Anonimu (talk) 15:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

What's the quote suggesting that? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 21:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I Realized a flaw in his "post WW3 thing

I n the advent of a War... omaha couldn't bre the capital. It is a major city and next to a major military position. Unless russia ignores all standard things to destroy such as not jsut the population but also military, omaha would be near ground zero for one or more of the bombs, so Really; "After the war, Omaha, Nebraska is the nation's new capital city." is impossible.--Jakezing (talk) 04:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Omaha, Nebraska is the headquarters for SAC. http://www.strategic-air-command.com/bases/Offutt_AFB.htm . A definite target for a nuclear attack.Kansas Bear (talk) 04:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, which both sucks and is great for me... --Jakezing (talk) 20:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Another time traveller in the mist forecasting the future. In this Universe, humans are ameoba-sized, and our brains are even smaller than that... --JJBeat not signed in and given up on the talk. (talk) 8:55, 18 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.193.8 (talk)

Sigh?--Jakezing (talk) 00:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

TITOR shows in old IBM logo

UPDATE August 31, 2008: The name TITOR shows in the corporate logo of the International Time Recording Company, which is one of the legal predecessor of IBM Corporation (1889-1914). Perhaps this inspired the writer of the John Titor hoax? --Onnozele (talk) 07:07, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

--Onnozele (talk) 20:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

maybe but we cant add it--Jakezing (talk) 23:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the name "TITOR". I see an I, a T, an R, a C and an O (or that last might just be a phi Φ). --Rpresser 14:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I added a picture that maps the way I read Titor in the ITR logo. I know it is speculative. But it's fun to wonder how the hoax came about. Linking the fictitious name to real things might lead us to the story teller. Onnozele (talk) 20:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

yes... the way YOU mapped it, by following a line that still dosn't say titor.--Jakezing (talk) 03:12, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Great find! It does say "Titor." My first guess on how Haber came up with the name was that "Titor" was short for "TimeTravel." Funny to see people still trying to defend this hoax. ~~Justtalk

Thanks, but do you agree this picture might have inspired the writer of the John Titor hoax? And if so, would that make the link to J.R. Haber stronger or weaken it? What do we know about Haber in relation to IBM anyway? Onnozele (talk) 20:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I think Titor is just backwards for "wrote it" so John Titor = John Rotit = John wrote it.... there are a lot of Johns out there.... ~~

So, we have to find a John, who has presumably a degree in physics, has ties to IBM, some historic notion and some imagination... that's still a lot of Johns. Onnozele (talk) 11:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Let me quote Darby, who was the admin at Anomalies.net where Titor posted:

"Titor first appeared on Time Travel Institute on 2-NOV-2000 as "TimeTravel_0". Raul Burriel owns that site. He's a professional web designed who has many big name contracts.

In 2000 those big names included Disney. He set up several advertising sites for the Disney Corporation. Among the Disney sites that he set up was the Celebration, Florida community BBS http://www.34747.net. The URL is the Zip Code for Celebration. The site no longer exists. Raul was the SysAdmin/Moderator for both 34747 and Time Travel Institute.

Celebration, Florida isn't a metropolis. In 2000-2001 it was an upscale ultra-modern planned community village wholly owned by Disney. It is located next door to Disneyworld Florida. Raul included a hot link to Time Travel Institute on the Celebration BBS. We believe that "TimeTravel_0", a Celebration resident, found Time Travel Institute via that hot link.

In 2000 Larry Haber was a corporate attorney for Disney. He lived in Celebration. In fact he was the first person to move into Celebration when it was build in the mid-1990's.

Titor comes and goes on both Post-2-Post and Time Travel Institute. Almost three years later "Mother Kay Titor" decides to write a book. Mom Titor is frightened - frightened that the Big Bad Govmit MIB's might make her family "disappear". She needs help from an attorney. Among all of the attorneys in Nebraska she just happens to contact a long lost law school pal of Larry Haber's. Haber hadn't seen or heard from this attorney for 25 years. Among all of the attorneys that Nebraska Attorney knows from his 25 year career he contacts someone that he hasn?t heard from for a quarter of a century, Larry Haber ? a stranger - the movie deal maker in Celebration Florida, to represent his scared to death client.

And so three years later the saga leads right back to Celebration, Florida. What a coincidence..."~~Justtalk

That... was pointless--Jakezing (talk) 16:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

That....was not "pointless." Darby clearly demonstrated how Titor was invented by Larry Haber. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.190.70.143 (talk) 02:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

ya and where's darby's sources? hmmm? looks like he could have just made all that up to disprove the titor story just like you claim haber did. 24.63.31.233 (talk) 21:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Uh...Darby IS the source. Darby is the one who had direct contract with "John Titor". He was the admin at the Anomalies website, where Titor posted. Go there and ask him if you want more detailed info. Adios, Titor hoax!

what happened to this article

This article use to be a shining example of what a good wikipedia article should be on a controversial subject. Now it's completely biased and just tries to disprove the John Titor story with no real information.24.63.31.233 (talk) 21:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but neither of your claims are true. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 00:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

This hoax has already been exposed for numerous reasons. One of them being that Titor claimed that there would be no official olympics after 2004. The 2008 olympics came and went. Let it go, it was a hoax. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.197.217.20 (talk) 16:33, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Ow, come on 24.63.31.233... we're just trying to find the writer of this entertaining story... because that is what it is... a story.... it's not about disproving... because there is nothing to disprove, not it there something to prove by the way. So no bias there. Furthermore, how can you claim what information is "real"... because the whole wikipedia is - like any other encyclopedia - a social construct of many individuals trying to find some common ground on the meaning of things... the only reality there is, is their own. Btw.. why are you anonymous anyway? Onnozele (talk) 11:02, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: "how can you claim what information is "real". Simple, the original Titor posts were sent to anomalies.net. Darby was and still is the admin for that website and had direct communication with "John Titor" (Larry Haber). No one is arguing against this. For more info, visit the anomalies website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.197.217.20 (talk) 19:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

except they weren't orginally posted to the "anomalies" website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.31.233 (talk) 17:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Uh....except they WERE originally posted to the Anomalies website. That is were this whole hoax started, duh.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.197.217.20 (talk • contribs)

Who took out the original links in the External Links and put in pages that no longer exist? Quit crappping on this article and put the original links back in! I demand that people quit changing this article to suit their whims when original links are given with the page that was here before, and I demand that they be put back in! Most of you people were not there, and really should have no say about anything. Start up your own website, then post your crap. It does not belong here in this article.

Nov.2nd 2008 (All Souls Day for Catholics) November 2nd, 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.193.77 (talk) 18:57, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Calm down, anon. Revert warring for two weeks and then making demands on the talk page isn't going to work. Wikipedia works by consensus and collaboration. Your reverts are undoing improvements made to the article and it sounds like all you really want is to restore some links. Tell us which links you'd like to see restored. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 19:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Your reverts are undoing improvements. 24.63.31.233 (talk) 22:07, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

The External Links do not work (as in most of them) anymore since the website (Time Travel Portal)has changed and what is listed in the External Links is not there as with the original links of the original threads that where give or a webcrawler backup link. I just suggest additional passwords for authorized people be given so anyone can not come here and post an old page with External Links and anything else that do not exist anymore. But that is up to Wikipedia. Yes, there are opinions floating around about any of this, I maintain it takes science and the rest is all changeable including the future, but at this time, there seems to be trend with some people. I do not claim Titor is real until it happens and that won't be until around 2034, for the time travel part.

November 2, 2008 (I would post who I am but that is not all that important. And I likely to do it wrong anyway. November 2, 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.193.77 (talk) 19:20, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

And there are many pages on the Internet that give what they think will be the future. These are religious websites about events and other people who claim what is happening in the USA and this world as of now (or slightly yesterday) or for some other purpose. They however, do not claim to be a time traveller and do have their own websites. More websites will also occur in the near future, so Wikipedia becomes more valid (perhaps in my own opinion) with its goals. Why do people think they just can change this page and put up old pages that have non-valid External Links again? I do not know, and I do not care what they think anymore. I have my own personal experiences.

November 2, 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.193.77 (talk) 19:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

You say that none of the links work, but I've just gone through them and here's the rundown:

• [4] works.
• [5] works
• [6] works
• [7] works
• [8] works, though one needs to log in to hear the interviews.
• [9] works
• [10] works
• [11] works
• Pages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and the last of backup pages made by WebCrawler, all work, though page 6 doesn't
• [12] works
• [13] works, though it isn't what it's advertised to be.
• [14] works.

So it's false to say that most of the external links "do not work." If you want to tell us what links you'd like to see added, please do so.

And it's not vandalism when I don't let you revert without explanation to a version of poorer quality and no citations, it's called vandal fighting. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 01:28, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Dead links

I've started weeding the external links.

I realize that many editors are unfamiliar with WP:External links, so I want to explain a few things:

• Anything at web.archive.org is always a dead link for the purposes of the ==External links== section. You can use it for ==References==, but not for ==EL==.
• Anything on a blog or a discussion forum is inappropriate for this section. Again, you can use it for ==References==, but not for ==EL==. In most of these cases, you should be using these as references.
• Just about anything that's used as a reference should not be duplicated under ==External links==.

Hope this helps, WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:18, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, thank you for clarifying. Makes sense to me. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 05:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I always thought that about the links but then I do not know Unix or exactly how these pages go either. Thanks - User:JJBeat 12 November 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.193.78 (talk) 19:33, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Too lazy to sign in. It is now page 97 at the web.archive.org for the original pages. http://web.archive.org/web/*sr_961nr_10/http://bbs.artbell.com/*

of pages of threadid (Thread Id) of the original webcrawler postings of John Titor at the Art Bell BBS Forum back then. Page 6 is somewhere else when it was listed in the External Links instead of in the Reference Section. Oh well! I guess it may keep changing because new content is added by the webcrawlers or because of changes made in that web site. The copy is at Anomalies.Net listed in the External Links - maybe that should be in the References - but then it is only a copy of the complete thread according to the posters at the time. User talk: JJ Beat 12 November 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.193.78 (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Original postings from TimeTravel_0 (John Titor) from the Time Travel Institute - is that an appropriate name?

http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/ttiforum/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=time_travel&Number=9237&page=2&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1 "Topic Limited to 11 Pages" thread started by TimeTravel_0 and all of that! So there it is again to annoy some in the world. Just remember you are sort of Inmates stuck in this Inertial Frame of Reference on this Planet. And no, you will not be leaving this planet any time soon whatever happens. And remember just for the yucks of it - some people may still be looking for the SOB that started up this entire mess (or several). Chimps, Champs, Chumps! New evidence points to the DNA of chimps leading up to humans so posted the other day on a forum. All this timetravel stuff as such. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_(Australopithecus) That is all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.193.87 (talk) 22:26, 22 November 2008 (UTC) November 22, 2008 Just to update old lost links that use to be on the Titor page article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.193.87 (talk) 22:29, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

References failing WP:V and WP:RS

After a quick glance through the references, I've noticed some references pointing at non-notable and unreliable opinions. Blog postings, livejournal, forums allegedly recounting things, etc. Unless the forum posts being linked to are the original verifiable posts by this individual they all fail WP:V and WP:RS as self-published sources and can't be used for citation.--Crossmr (talk) 03:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Can you specify which sources just to be clear and also tag the section? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 16:39, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

1. I'm not sure about this source: http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/ I can't even tell who it is by or anything. There is no identifiable author but it reads like a fan site. Seems like a self-published source. The main strategic brains website gives no more information.
2. This source http://www.idlewords.com/about.htm a self-identified painter and computer guy. This is a self-published source and the individual isn't identified as a published and recognized expert on John Titor. Therefore you can't source any facts about titor from him.
3. http://www.johntitor.com/ As a fansite its normally out, but since the author seems to have been interviewed on the subject of titor, he might pass the test of being an expert in the field. Some information identifying who we are sourcing here should be provided.
4. http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread61559/pg1 this is a forum, it appears to be a recounting of something else. Unfortunately not usable. The original may be usable (I don't know where it comes from), but not this. Same with the other sources from this site.
5. http://oldcomputers.net/ibm5100.html - again same self-published concerns, however we're not citing anything overly contentious and it isn't about the subject of the article. Is he saying anything that isn't included in the pdf about the systems that is already used as a citation?
6. http://communities.anomalies.net/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=14859&page=5&fpart=4 Another forum, and this http://www.anomalies.net/object/titorirc.html sent to the anomalies network from an unnamed source proport to show couldn't be any more unreliable.
7. http://community.livejournal.com/hoaxes/90359.html again self-published.

I'm not going to clutter the article with tags for all those right now, but since it appeared someone was working on clean-up, I thought they could incorporate the removal/replacement of those references.--Crossmr (talk) 02:08, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

if you read the talk page up you'll notice that Aeusoes1 has an agenda he's trying to push. I made the same argument that forums shouldn't be taken as fact but he denies this point. 24.63.31.233 (talk) 19:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, my agenda is described here. Muahahaha.

Seriously, though. Crossmr is right that we should be cautious about internet blogs, but I suspect that internet sources are going to be our best bet for a lot of the information since this is a phenomenon largely restricted to the internet and coast to coast AM. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately that doesn't give us license to disregard WP:V and WP:RS if blogs are the only thing that can provide the information then it shouldn't be in the article. We don't get to put in inappropriate sources because better ones aren't available.--Crossmr (talk) 01:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

True. I was mostly responding to your comment regarding www.johntitor.com, which is not a blog, livejournal, or forum.

I'm surprised no one's caught on to this article's approach to WP:PRIMARY, which states that "All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source." We've got a lot of primary source (quotes from Titor's posts, which are as verifiable as we can make them) but the secondary sources are kind of thin outside the internets. Isn't that problematic? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 01:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

No, but its still a self-published source. Self-published sources can be used if the author of the source is an identified expert on the subject. Which the author of the site may be since he's been interviewed on the subject. Any quotes from titor's posts have to come from the original posts or a reliable source reporting on them. These forum posts, live journal, blogs etc which report the contents of titor's posts have to go unfortunately and can't be used to cite the claims. There is no way for any reader to verify that the person who wrote that forum, blog, fansite, etc accurately reported the original posting and as a self-published source we have no reason to believe it. There is no primary source for john titor except for the original posts he made using his identified accounts.--Crossmr (talk) 03:49, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, the original posts have been lost from their original location but survive as copies in various places. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 08:52, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately that isn't good enough for wikipedia. Unless they survive in a place that is considered a reliable source. If the original posts were caught on archive.org you could use that.--Crossmr (talk) 09:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand why this isn't good enough. If multiple sources that, by themselves, are unreliable but altogether demonstrate reliability in consistently duplicating the texts of Titor posts, that seems good enough. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 11:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Because we can't override WP:V and WP:RS with multiple agreeing sources which are not reliable sources. Who is to say that one of those sites didn't write it first and then the rest of the copied it? If that was all we needed to do, I'll go start one blog to say one thing, then duplicate it to 10 more.. that is why we can't use them as a reliable source. Even if we had a million of them. There is no way for an independent editor to actually verify that that content is accurate. If an editor can't do that, we can't have it in the article.--Crossmr (talk) 12:54, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

All right, so then the crux of the matter is www.johntitor.com which, although not the original place, is the only source with JT posts that you say could be verifiable enough. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 17:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

If that is the case yes. If no other reliable sources have reprinted his posts and the originals are completely lost there isn't much choice. Its impossible for any editor to verify if some guy on a random forum is factually reprinting what was in that thread. The editor of Johntitor.com might be considered an expert in the field and therefore anything he publishes may be considered a reliable source but it needs to be attributed as such if it is self-published. According to the editor at Johntitor.com blah blah blah...--Crossmr (talk) 00:22, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Major changes

The 24.xxx ip reverted this page to an old version on the 13th. This old version is vastly inferior to the current state. The old version has little to no real world analysis and consists almost entirely of original research evalution of the claims. The current version is a fairly well balanced encyclopedia article, the old version really reads like a fan's personal webpage about Titor. --Leivick (talk) 05:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for noticing that. I guess I wasn't paying attention that day. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 06:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

And your version of the page reads like slander. I propose we merge the two version together so that they give equal attention to both all of his claims, which the older version does, and the new one which attempts to debunk them. 24.63.31.233 (talk) 15:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I've reverted your revert since that's not in accordance with your suggestion above. Now, where exactly is the slander and what specific changes do you propose we make to the article? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 18:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Anon, I can save you a lot more time by pointing out that pure stubbornness doesn't get you anywhere here. Stop revert warring, start discussing. You're sullying your seemingly legitimate opinion with poor behavior. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 22:36, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

These pages are original thread postings either through web.archive.org, or the original posting website like Time Travel Institute, or by

Anomalies.net from the original posters on those threads. The pictures are the first original pictures given by Titor, and the other page in the web.archive.org of the cleaned up pictures given by Titor (also have Art Bell saying he as the copyright to those pictures and the link in web.archive.org were given to any thing about this Article on John Titor. http://web.archive.org/web/20010606231142/http://www.artbell.com/letters11.html I found the original pages Archived (had to add page number or look through 80 pages of links of the threadid=1203 postings of John Titor.) Page 1 of the thread "I am from 2036" http://web.archive.org/web/20010413040811/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=1 Page 2 http://web.archive.org/web/20010413040629/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=2 Page 3 http://web.archive.org/web/20010413041338/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=3 Page 4 http://web.archive.org/web/20010413041759/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=4 Page 5 http://web.archive.org/web/20010413042026/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=5 Last page (as that is all that was put in the web archive) http://web.archive.org/web/20010413042703/bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=lastpage Page in the Internet Archive where the pages are listed and the date those pages were stored there. http://web.archive.org/web/*sr_871nr_10/http://bbs.artbell.com/* The pages I am referring to: bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=1 1 page from Apr 13, 2001 bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=2 1 page from Apr 13, 2001 bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=3 1 page from Apr 13, 2001 bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=4 1 page from Apr 13, 2001 bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=5 1 page from Apr 13, 2001 bbs.artbell.com/showthread.php?threadid=1203&pagenumber=lastpage 1 page from Apr 13, 2001

It is now page 97 at the web.archive.org for the original pages. http://web.archive.org/web/*sr_961nr_10/http://bbs.artbell.com/*

Original postings from TimeTravel_0 (John Titor) from the Time Travel Institute - is that an appropriate name? http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/ttiforum/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=time_travel&Number=9237&page=2&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1 "Topic Limited to 11 Pages" thread started by TimeTravel_0

http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/CopyrightProof.cfm This person may be a physicist, and holds an opinion. No, I am not sure about that but other original posters on those threads above do know him.

http://www.johntitor.com/ I do not know this person either. He came on the scene later like other forums did also copying what Titor had posted.

The other original threads at the Time Travel Institute were lost due to a harddisk drive failure of the server. These were handed over to another original poster at the time at Anomalies.net of a person we know who was on the Art Bell's Forum original postings. The web.archive.org pages of those threads do not include all of the original 61 pages of postings - only six of those pages, with page 6 somewhere else in that maze, along with page 42. I could look for them, but only page 6 was really important, and the last page in the web.archive.org is just really how long that original thread (ID-1203) really was, and that link is also given. The rest of anything else is copies on forums, and opinions of people who came across Titors Postings at the time. Only the web.archive.org and Time Travel Institute Forums and Anomalies.net (although a copy) hold the original threads and in the case at Anomalies - the original pictures given by Titor and by original posters on Titor's Thread. I do not know how to make it more clear on what is what for this Article. Even the links in web.archive.org of why the Art Bell BBS Post to Post forum shut down shortly after Titor posted. All already given on this Discussion Page up above, but listed here again for what seems to be - thick-headed people I guess. These links were on the Article Page, and then someone else changed it again and wrecked the page. I guess these links belong in the Reference Section and not the External Links Section, but again, I do not know how to add them again for the upteened teenage acting time. No, I am not bitter, I expect a more intelligent discussion then some people who change things on a whim. So I will not add them, but liste them here again - Original Links - Original Postings and anything else is just another opinion. 64.22.193.9 (talk) 20:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC) J.J. Beat (not signed in) March 12, 2008.

These Anomalies.net links are what could be done with only copies of the Time Travel Institute Threads that were lost due to the harddisk drive failure of the original threads posted there (then put on the Anomalies.net Forum under "Time Travel" section on that forum by an original poster (who works on the SDI for the Government at that time and probably still) and original posters plus the original pictures with the two Reference Section links, and the External Links Section where Anomalies.net is listed. Anomalies.net has nothing to do with the book, or anything else - it is a website where the threads lost and the original pictures (not cleaned up) could be put up by an original poster (because he has something to do with the website originally). That is all that could be done, when websites fail or websites go off-line forever. Anything else may be in web.archive.org, but those early links (all of which have changed now) would have to be found in web.archive.org, and Time Travel Institute (also noted above) did not allow it on web.archive.org, because it is the same website as xone.net or whatever it is listed up above in this discussion as where the original threads were and also where they became corrupt on that website. Anywhere else especially like with the images from Titor are websites that no longer exist, but still some research maybe might be able to find a web.archive.org page on this - that is unknown because actually unless someone wants to take the "time" to do that - we all have a life to live and John Titor is not really a priority in that regard.

64.22.193.9 (talk) 21:03, 12 March 2009 (UTC) J.J. Beat March 12, 2009

Oops! These links of the Anomalies.net website listed on the Article Page of John Titor:

Reference Section of Article:

http://communities.anomalies.net/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/245484/fpart/1

http://www.anomalies.net/object/titorirc.html

External Links Section of Article:

http://www.anomalies.net/object/johntitor.html

All of this was listed up above in this Discussion and why it ocurred this way. The original Time Travel Website (Xone.net or something like that had a harddisk drive failure of the server - later it became(still the same website) "Time Travel Institute". Those corrupt threads from there were copied and perserved over at Anomalies.net by original posters and can be found - yes - in the Time Travel forum Section of Anomalies.net. The External Link weblink for Anomalies are the original early pictures from John Titor, and unless you want to look through the web.archive.org for links that long ago disappeared and no longer exist even if there is a web copy of anything, then Anomalies.net is the only place you can view those pictures because of all that happens with websites and *.com's not existing anymore. All of it from original posters. These are the only original places except where Anomalies.net has a copy because some of it can not be looked up at web.archive.org - Time Travel Institute when it changed names from Xone.net can not be looked up on the web.archive.org, because they really do not have to allow that and all of that is explained up above in this discussion. That is all of the original links and Anomalies.net is where the corrupt threads from Time Travel Institute (as it is called now) ended up by having copies of those threads from original posters and also the non-cleaned-up images from John Titor. If that is not good enough, anyone can find the old links and try and find them in the web.archive.org if they want to. I know, because I am an original poster like some others I talk to, but do not expect me to give you my name. Just as much as Pamela won't be here to tell you anything either. It was a science discussion, and none of yous would have known about it in the first place if it was not put up at the time or later by original posters, and none of this would be discussed at all.

64.22.193.9 (talk) 21:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC) J.J. Beat 12 March 2009

Oh, and yes, there were moderators on the original forum Post to Post Art Bell BBS forum. That is because like above as explained, some posters can not be civilized, so the Moderator of the forum also "Edited" some posters along the way while it was going on!

64.22.193.18 (talk) 22:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC) J.J. Beat 12 March 2009

Concise Bibliography

I think we should all pool our heads together and come up with a completle and concise biblopgrahy of all the information we have of direct quotes from timetraveler00. Primary Sources only. This way we can come up with a complete overview of his posts.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.61.141 (talk • contribs)

I don't understand what you mean. Isn't there already such a bibliography? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 17:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes but I thinkk it needs to be organized a little better. Will you agree to help me form a partnership and we will improve the article so much that one day we get on the front page/. 76.119.61.141 (talk) 19:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

How should it be organized? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:07, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

What the !*#%!?

This sentence sums up everything what's wrong with Wikipedia

" the website www.johntitor.com points to some of the controversies of the opening ceremonies, such as Lin Miaoke lip-synching and fireworks being computer simulated as suggestive that the entire Olympics were faked."

The Bejing Olympics were FAKED?! Come one people, do we really need this sort of nonsense posted here as if it was factual? Go visit a doctor if you believe in this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.110.72 (talk) 11:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

That's a good point. As a fringe topic, giving both sides of the issue might give undue weight to fringe POV's. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 07:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Commercial rights ownership?

I don't see how Haber can own commercial rights ownership of John Titor. First, if there really was a John Titor, unless he signs those rights away, he owns them. Second, the only way Haber can own the rights to someone who may or may not exist is if *he* or someone else (with whom he negotiated rights) created John Titor. This article needs some real help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.220.60.24 (talk) 21:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

now what happened with the theory of" Changing or removing the events just by talking about one that would had happen if not prevented by talking about it"?

well how did sharing a tiny peep hole of the future change most of the future or even postponed it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blix1ms0ns (talk • contribs) 18:19, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD

I've launched an AfD for this article because, to be blunt, I don't think it's the purpose of an encyclopedia to document some random internet hoax. I don't think anybody acutally beleives this guy is a time traveller from the future. So what makes him different from any other knucklehead to go onto abovetopsecret.com and claim to have special powers? Simonm223 (talk) 14:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Because

   Again an answer that probably will not please some "knuckleheads" on the Internet. First, the original threads in the Reference Section are not mentioned - and one - Anomalies.net is one that retained threads lost by the crash on the server at then Xone.net which is now TimeTravel Institute and the original Time Travel Institute thread by TimeTravel_0 (John Titor) proving he was posting on the Art Bell BBS forum later at the same time as well as the Time Travel Institute forum:

http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/ttiforum/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=time_travel&Number=9237&page=2&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

As well, as not really keeping up with all the science coming out which I am not going to re-look up. New measurements on the gravity of the Earth - call them hills and vallys of gravity across this planet done just recently by a satellite. As well as new theories concerning black holes from: http://arxiv.org/list/gr-qc/pastweek?skip=25&show=25

Plus the rest of the general emotional humdrum acts that inhabit this planet by other humans on this planet, which either to me means that they don't like how this world is going, or overreacting to it with the emotions, or just plain want to be as negative as the Article and Page on John Titor really is. "Oh, John Titor made a prediction and guessed wrong", so he is a hoax out of these people. None of which anyone can prove with any certainty for or against. And the rest of the original links listed up above, with other original pictures at Anomalies.net. All people have a choice for their future, and taking it out on a webpage about a supposed time traveller just seems way immature to me. There is no AboveTopSecret at first nor any other website originally except those mentioned along with the Archive pages on John Titor about the Art Bell BBS forum by the webcrawler then at that time with the date it was done, which I think is April or May, 2001 following the discussion that ended with Titor by March, 2001. talk:JJB | talk]]), 21 October 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by JJBeat (talk • contribs) 01:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but I didn't precisely follow that. Could you please rephrase what you were saying in a bit of a more cohesive manner? Perhaps without the non-sequiturs about gravitational research? Simonm223 (talk) 14:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3