For the most part, this and other Titor forums seem to be officially or unofficially moderated by people who don't accept/reject the story, but are willing to examine the issues. I am happy for the guidance.
But some people seem hell-bent on telling everyone this is a hoax and a fraud, and "why can't you see it" and "I'll be the one to blow it wide open". Yes - we can see that it is likely a fiction - but it is a story that has the quality of suspending disbelief, as all good tales must do.
Is it a fraud? - if it is fiction, then the fraud is in portraying himself as being some other person (and who hasn't done that in their life, even to some small extent?), but to what end? There does not seem to be an monetary gain.
Is there proof? - we have all seen the pics - are they proof? No, not proof. Interesting yes, even convincing, but any image can be edited and manipulated. We cannot be assured of the chain of evidence, so the images cannot be considered proof. Not even the vehicle registration form dated after JT departure, but posted before the date. This was to be a sort of proof that he could time travel by jumping into the near future and getting an official document. The image is still editable and not physiscal proof. What of his predictions? He never really made any hard predictions.
So it is all a lie, a hoax?
Well, that's just it. As a story, it has a reasonable-ness to it. Is it that stupid that he should post on a time travel forum? It offers anonimity whilst providing access to a group of people open to the topic, giving him a way to gauge and interact with contemporary people. There is no way he would go to TV or press. Also, forums on other topics would just ignore him or kick him off. "Hi, NBA Seattle Sonics forum, my name is John Titor and I have travelled from the year 2036".
So, TT forums provide a platform for him. Does he claim to be a famous person (a la "Davey Crockett")? Nope, just an army man, with a penchant for history. Just on a little personal diversion from the main mission. Ah, a soft side. Helps make us view him as a real person.
What about the hardware, the time machine? We see some pictures of it, but not quite close enought to read words or details. But it looks like some sort of utilitarian military electronic device, doesn't it? If it were real , he's not likely to give us a good look. But also if fake, he's not likely to give us a close look. Either way, this behaviour is not leaning distincting in one direction or another, but it does add questionability. It makes you own personal opinion less sure.
There has been discussion about how two pics are of the machine in exactly the same position, yet one is altered by haveing some apparent stickers edited out. The pic showing the stickers (I'll call pic1) is more like a photo, and we can see that the extra stickers are not squared up on the top case, placed post production. I think these are perhaps John's personal stickers or notes. If we then see the othe pic (pic2), then these two stickers are not shown. The image is like a bad photocopy of a photograph, flatening all the greys or colors out to be black and white. But can you see it is on a page that is a cover page or main page for a manual? I have seen a few military manuals, and the covers sometimes include an image, and when they do, it is usually identifiable but with low level of details. Perhaps it was prepared this way on purpose, deleting the non-standard stickers. Perhaps, perhaps.
But see what is happening here? I am trying to rationalize the issue of proof for these images. Why? Becuase they are on the edge of being acceptable as fact, and with a bit of extrapolating, perhaps a fact could be positively nailed down. Or it could be decisively found as fake.
What about the theory of how the time machine works? It all sounds like quasi-science, but perhaps he was just dumbing it down. Or specifically blanding out the details. Let's see, how does it go? Two spinning micro-singularities, one "main" one "steering". By injecting electrons, the interaction of the two singularity's gravity causes a gravity field or distortion of a predictable controlable nature. The distortion of gravity affects light speed, and thereby, relative time around the field. Being within this field provides some ability to select a different relative time, though no physical movement occurs. The amount of time travelled seems related to how long the traveller is within the gravity distortion field, so it seems an on/off machine, where the target is made by mathematical navigation. Dates seem important to this calculation.
It has elements that sound as we would like them to be. "Time travel by wormhole, or traveling near the speed of light - thats unlikley, but by gravity distortion? Hmm, sounds almost do-able. Yeah, I've heard that light slows or is bent by gravity. They're still trying to understand gravity. Yeah, I've heard that CERN is making black holes. Yeah, it would make sense that navigation relies on certain dates and times." etc.
It all enough to suspend our disbelief. It almost sounds plausible. And that's what makes it such a hot topic. If we had definate proof tomorrow, this would all die off. But because it has enough elements to possibly be fact, it generates lots of discussion. I mean - just look at this! I had just wanted to post a 4 line response, and it got away from me...
On a different tack, take the issue of time travel away from John Titor and what do you have? You still have a series of interesting/disturbing observations on society that are valid discussion points in themselves. If nothing else, what other suposed time traveller has provoked discusison on civil liberties, the constitution, CJD, advertising, food?
But wouldn't these question be what a legitimate time traveller history specialist would ask? Or isn't that what we would expect, so that is what the master hoaxer built in?
Keep an open (but questioning) mind.
I was hoping we would hear more from Charlie.
DJ