John Titor is a fraud - here's a brief reason why

[Goro_Lives]

John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason why

The comment in question:

---
As you are probably aware, UNIX will have a timeout error in 2038 and many of the mainframe systems that ran a large part of the infrastructure were based on very old IBM computer code. The 5100 has the ability to easily translate between the old IBM code, APL, BASIC and (with a few tweaks in 1975) UNIX. This may seem insignificant but the fact that the 5100 is portable means I can easily take it back to 2036. I do expect they will create some sort of emulation system to use in multiple locations.
---


Software developers are well aware of this problem. It's referred to as the 2038 UNIX time problem and there are 2 viable solutions for it.

The problem stems from the UNIX operating system representing time as a 32-bit value which has a rather limited range of time values. The last date UNIX can handle is Jan 19, 2038. The first solution is to advance the epoch date (January 1, 1970) to extend the wrap-around date by another several decades. The second solution is upgrade to 64-bit processors. Both of these solutions require recompilation and potentially small code tweaks which admittedly can be difficult to locate, however hold your judgement for a moment. (A 3rd solution is to use an unsigned 32-bit value versus a signed value. I don't consider this reasonably viable.)

The threat is the danger that old 32-bit hardware and software will still be in existence in 2038, and therefore could pose a serious problem should a nuclear reactor contain such systems. The reality is that threat is nonsense. We've had the same problem with Y2K and there were no issues because upgrades are common and eventual. It's ALWAYS cheaper and easier to replace legacy hardware and software than it is to repair them. This is mainly due to decreased hardware costs, added feature sets, and increased productivity from new tools.

We currently have a lead time of 32 years and we're already well into the switch to 64-bit systems. Compare to the Y2K problem where most corporations began preparations as late as 1 to 3 years before 2000. EVERY hardware and software system fails at some point. It's simply not possible to run a nuclear power plant on hardware so old there are no replacement parts and no knowledgeable developers. When components fail, they're generally replaced with newer/modern counterparts, therefore those legacy 32-bit systems will be replaced by 64-bit systems at some point in time. Statistics is on our side with regard to mean time to failure.

Also, consider the reason we're undergoing the transition to 64-bit systems. 32-bit applications cannot address more than 4 GB of memory. This is a severe limitation for many large scale applications, so there is a very strong incentive to use 64-bit operating systems which scale up to a potential 17,179,869,184 GB. There was no such driving factor immediately prior to Y2K and yet we sailed through Y2K with no problems.

Another thing to consider is that most systems are data driven. They store and retrieve data from an external storage system, such as an Oracle database. Those databases do not store time as a simple 32-bit value. They will not suffer the 2038 problem. Even if they did, upgrading a database is a simple matter. It occurs frequently. Ask a database administrator.

Lastly, I predict within 7 years, 95% of the population will be running a 64-bit operating system on their personal desktops. 64-bit operating systems will be as common as salsa at a taco bar.

Titor was toying with you by casually referring to the 2038 problem. By pretending to not fully understand the problem, he fostered an air of plausibility. The 2038 problem will not exist when 2038 arrives. This is fear mongering constructed from partial facts and false implications.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_time#32-bit_overflow
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem

 

[Darby]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason why

Goro Lives,

Software developers are well aware of this problem. It's referred to as the 2038 UNIX time problem and there are 2 viable solutions for it.

Absolutely correct. And the programmers won't be waiting for 30 years to fix the problem.

Beginning 20-JAN-2008 bond and mortgage broker-dealers, for example, will have to have a fix in place if their business suite is running under 32-bit UNIX and they deal in 30 year notes and mortgages.

New 30-yr notes and mortgages will have maturity dates that are beyond the Y2K38 date rollover window.

The same situation came up on 1-JAN-1970 for the Y2K problem. They began solving the issue in the 1960's (unless I'm mistaken and no 30-yr notes or mortgages were issued after 1-JAN-1970

).

 

[bogz]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason why

Perl & Ruby are shiney gem's. I once wrote a text based calculator in Perl that could add numbers of ANY length.

 

[MEM]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason why

Consider the possibility of legacy software written in the 1970s that operate critical but hidden portions of the nations infrastructure, software written for the s/360 that migrates to Unix hardware that emulates a s/360 where the fix to the 2038 problem causes the s/360 code to halt. And one needs a 5100 to read and edit the s/360 binary code to fix the problem because the s/360 source code was lost long ago.

Have you considered that? I would be interested in your opinion of this analysis.

 

[Goro_Lives]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

I've been a software developer for 9 years and I've never seen legacy software that couldn't be reimplemented cheaper and faster using new tools. As long as you know the input and expected output, you can reimplement it. If you don't know that, you won't understand the system enough to even install the emulator. Think of it this way. Imagine you're presented with an antique Pac-Man video game from 1985. You have no manuals, no documentation, and no source code. How difficult is it to reimplement that Pac-Man game in Java?

Google shows 2 million hits on "pac-man java". Apparently, a whole lot of people have done it. Not to mention they did it in their spare time on the weekend.
http://www.google.com/search?q=pac-man+java&btnG=Google+Search

Software just isn't as mysterious and fantastical as some people would like to believe. It's usually very mundane and very predictable.

 

[MEM]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

So you are saying that people just don't keep old software around? That they would rewrite it rather than reuse it running on new hardware?

Not trying to be confrontational. I am interested in your response.

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

Thank you Goro,

I've been trying to explain to MEM for a long time how common reverse engineering software is. But I guess he wouldn't believe me, as I'm just an aerospace engineer. The Titor story is quite a stretch when it comes to the computer technology end of it.

RMT

 

[MEM]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

Thanks for your input RMT. That was very helpful to the discussion.

I asked an IBM guru the following:

“Is much of the infrastructure of the USA run by applications written
for the IBM S/360 machine?”

His answer:

“Quite probably. In particular, I can say with certainty that the air traffic
system in the US is run on 360-family systems (I belive they're actually IBM
9083s, a version of the 3083, these days, but still software compatible).
Every credit card transaction you make with a Visa, Mastercard, or American
Express card goes through an IBM mainframe. Nearly all of the airline
reservation systems, and a lot of others, run on IBM mainframes. I seem to
recall reading somewhere that well over 90% of the Fortune 500 use IBM
mainframe systems for some portion of their business data processing.

I should mention here that every IBM mainframe built since the introduction
of System/360 is compatible with the 360 instruction set. IBM added many new
architectural features, but they religiously maintained backward
compatibility at the application level.”

So it seems today there is quite a bit of "infrastructure" software written for the s/360 instruction set that has yet to be converted.

I'm curious what you think of this person's response.

 

[bogz]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason why

Consider the possibility of legacy software written in the 1970s that operate critical but hidden portions of the nations infrastructure,

Sure as long as you _consider_ the same software was upgarded in the 80's. As for your IBM "expert" he meant to say Oracle.

 

[MEM]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason why

Was that a response or a "flame?"

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

MEM,

I'm curious what you think of this person's response.

In a word: Yawn. And I would add that your question would be classified as "leading the witness", for nowhere did you elicit any responses about "and where might this infrastructure be in the process of upgrade to modern standards?"

Your acquaintence may be an IBM guru, but I am an aviation guru. While his response about ATC is technically correct it is woefully simplistic and would lead a neophyte to believe that the "whole ATC system" is based on IBM S/360. The ATC is a vast "system of systems", of which the ARTCC's (Air Route Traffic Control Center) HOST computer is currently based on an S/390 architecture in model 9672 machines. But the issue of "legacy" computer hardware AND software resources has been on the FAA's radar screen for many years now, and has been undergoing modernization at various levels since the late 80s. So if you think his response is somehow validation that the John Titor story could come to pass, or is valid with respect to its teasing technical tidbits about S/360 and the IBM 5100, you are simply mistaken.

I could provide an awful lot of quotes and resouces to inform you about how the ATC system is structured, the need for (and adoption of) an architecture development plan to guide the massive upgrade, and even status reports on both HW and SW upgrades to the host computer system. You just let me know how much data you want, and I will provide. But if you think ANY kind of known date/time/calendar anomaly with any OS used in the ATC system is going to somehow escape the upgrade program, I will simply say you are being naieve. The FAA proved the ARTCC was "Y2K compliant" MANY years before the event happened. While some people like to paint the FAA as a bunch of bumbling fools, may I remind those people that the FAA is the most successful and efficient of the world's airspace regulatory bodies, especially when it comes to the most important metric, which is numbers of passengers delivered to their destination without harm.

Here are just a few tidbits of info for you:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=11575&rsbci=0&fti=112&ti=0&sc=400
LOCKHEED-MARTIN COMPLETES KEY COMPUTER UPGRADE AT FAA ARTCCs

The HOCSR contract, divided into four phases, was awarded in 1998 and is valued at approximately $226 million. The first phase of the program, which upgraded mainframe computers, was successfully achieved at the first center, New York, in 11 months. Within 17 months of the startup date, all 23 sites had achieved government acceptance. In Phase 2, software was developed to update the control program software; upgrade of the storage devices was done under Phase 3. Phase 4, the final phase of the program, will complete the upgrade of the remaining peripheral hardware that comprises the Host Computer System.

"Even with the HOCSR modernization, a complete overhaul of the underlying software infrastructure will be needed for continued efficiency, capacity and functional improvements," said Corcoran. "Lockheed Martin will re-architect the infrastructure through the En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM) program. ERAM is critical to the ongoing evolution of the National Airspace System and will provide a modular, expandable and supportable infrastructure capable of providing flexible routing, more accurate and timely surveillance information, and improved security and safety functions."

http://www.house.gov/transportation/aviation/10-31-03/10-31-03memo.html
STATUS of FAA ATC MODERNIZATION PROGRAM -- ERAM

ERAM will provide new hardware and software to modernize the backbone of the ATC system, the HOST computer system. FAA estimates ERAM will cost $2.1 billion and be complete in 2008. This program is a highly software intensive program and will require over one million lines of code.

ERAM has three main components: 1) En Route Communications Gateway (ECG) to replace the Peripheral Adapter Module Replacement Item (PAMRI), 2) ERAM Back up System (EBS) to adapt the STARS fusion tracker to replace the Micro En Route Automated Radar Tracking System (MicroEARTS), and 3) replacement of the HOST computer system.

The third component of this program is the most critical. The HOST Computer will reach the end of its useful life in 2008 when FAA will no longer be able to procure parts necessary to maintain the system.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=17364&rsbci=0&fti=111&ti=0&sc=400
LOCKHEED MARTIN COMPLETES SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT ON SCHEDULE FOR FAA EN ROUTE AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION (ERAM) PROGRAM

The ERAM program will now move into the integration and testing phase. Following initial integration of the software, formal entry into the testing phase is scheduled to start in March 2006. Tests will be run at the FAA Technical Center in Atlantic City, NJ, and at Lockheed Martin laboratories, to validate that the software meets all requirements. The FAA is scheduled to accept the system in October 2007, followed by site testing as part of the ERAM deployment phase to the en route centers.

ERAM will replace an en route computer system that has evolved since the 1960s. That system is difficult to modify with new controller decision-support tools that are needed to increase capacity and improve safety and efficiency. ERAM will provide a modular, expandable and supportable infrastructure that can accommodate innovation and steady enhancements.

There's plenty more information out there. But I think what I have provided is sufficient to counter any suggestion that government and corporate America is simply sitting on its hands and allowing infrastructure to waste away (or be subject to some hoax TT'ers alleged calendar bug). At some point I think you are going to have to give up the "yeah, but it COULD happen just like Titor said it would" stance and take note that the odds are highly against Titor's S/360 and IBM 5100 story being even remotely plausible. But you take your time...there is all the time in the world for those who cling to myths.

Did this post meet your standards for adding to the discussion? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
RMT

 

[MEM]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

RMT,

You are a real dick-head. I did not say that all computer programs run on IBM/360 hardware. Only that some of the nation's infrastructure does. Are you really that stupid.

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

You are a real dick-head. I did not say that all computer programs run on IBM/360 hardware. Only that some of the nation's infrastructure does. Are you really that stupid.

Sweet. Should I start calling you names now? Is this the time we really get nasty?

You will note that NOWHERE did I state, nor imply, that they all run on IBM/360 hardware! What I was addressing above is your presumption that all this "infrastructure" is just going to hang around, unchanged, until 2038. I am challenging THAT point you think you are making...

If I'm a dickhead, then you are just plain clueless! Instead of calling me names, why don't you address the CLEAR and CONSPICUOUS data I have presented above? The only reason you think I am a dickhead is because I can refute your "it just might happen" attitude about Titor's story.
RMT

 

[bogz]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason why

No I was pointing out your use of the word CONSIDER can be used on either side of the argument.

 

[Peter_Novak]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason why

Software developers are well aware of this problem. It's referred to as the 2038 UNIX time problem and there are 2 viable solutions for it. [...] The first solution is to advance the epoch date (January 1, 1970) to extend the wrap-around date by another several decades. The second solution is upgrade to 64-bit processors. Both of these solutions require recompilation and potentially small code tweaks which admittedly can be difficult to locate, [...] We've had the same problem with Y2K and there were no issues because upgrades are common and eventual. [...]
We currently have a lead time of 32 years and we're already well into the switch to 64-bit systems. Compare to the Y2K problem where most corporations began preparations as late as 1 to 3 years before 2000. [...] I predict within 7 years, 95% of the population will be running a 64-bit operating system on their personal desktops. [...] The 2038 problem will not exist when 2038 arrives.

Yeah, but what if we don't have those seven years?

It sounds to me like you're saying that they know the problem exists, they know how to fix it, and only need the time necessary to do so. Would the civil war etc that Titor predicted get in the way of those repairs, depriving us of the time necessary to fix this problem by refocusing our attention and efforts on more immediately urgent matters, and culling the number of living technical experts capable of successfully addressing this issue?

- Peter

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason why

Peter,

Would the civil war etc that Titor predicted get in the way of those repairs, depriving us of the time necessary to fix this problem by refocusing our attention and efforts on more immediately urgent matters, and culling the number of living technical experts capable of successfully addressing this issue?

You are speculating about a civil war that has not only NOT come to pass, but also shows absolutely no signs of coming to pass even now after Titor's prediction period.

As I pointed out above, the Air Traffic Control system is already in the process of major infrastructure updates. The software portion of this has already been designed and is beginning test and integration. The "turn on" date is 2008.

RMT

 

[Peter_Novak]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

You are speculating about a civil war that has not only NOT come to pass, but also shows absolutely no signs of coming to pass even now after Titor's prediction period.

Well, yes, I am speculating, granted. I was just pointing out that within the boundaries of the Titor history, he already gave a perfectly viable explanation as to why those needed repairs wouldn't have been completed by 2036. In other words, his story is internally consistent on this issue, and the fact that our present-day experts are already aware of the problem does not in and of itself guarantee that the problem will be resolved in time.

However, I would take issue with your claim that Titor's civil war shows "absolutely no signs of coming to pass". There are in fact numerous signs, such as (1) the $385 million contract recently given to Halliburton to build concentration camps in America, and (2) the fire that The Powers That Be recently decided to light under the illegal immigration issue, and (3) the recent shocking warning by retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor that America was at risk of slipping into a dictatorship, and (4) the simple fact that the American populace is more viciously divided on political issues now than we've been at any time since the last Civil War.

As for the observation that we are not yet already in Titor's predicted Second American Civil War, that is true enough, but his story allowed for some degree of divergnce between his timeline and our own, which to me means that he could have been telling the truth about his timeline and that we still might not be out of the woods in our own tineline. The divergence between his timeline and our own was supposed to be about 2% in early 2001, and his effect on our timeline would have increased that diversion to some degree. We don't know how much.

- Peter

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

Peter,

However, I would take issue with your claim that Titor's civil war shows "absolutely no signs of coming to pass". There are in fact numerous signs,

All of your items are, again, based on speculative ideas. As to their specifics:

(1) the $385 million contract recently given to Halliburton to build concentration camps in America

Could you show me a Federal notice of contract award for this item, one which actually uses the words "concentration camps"? And why do we need to build more when (according to internet rumors for many years) FEMA has already been "managing" such "concentration camps" for years?

(2) the fire that The Powers That Be recently decided to light under the illegal immigration issue

No matter how many millions of illegals there are in our country, you cannot technically count their opinions and/or dissentions about the debate over this problem towards a "civil war" for the simple fact that they are NOT citizens and as such they do not get to vote. Given that I live in Los Angeles I can tell you that these people are smart enough to know that if they create any sort of violent uprising, especially with any intentions towards inciting "civil war", they know they will be cutting their own throats and worsening their chances of amnesty. Again, they are ILLEGAL, we just happen to have turned a blind eye to them being here for so long. Legal Americans are hardly stupid enough to start a civil war over illegal aliens. Now, we might start a war (not civil) AGAINST the illegal aliens, but that would be something totally different (and also not very likely to occur).

(3) the recent shocking warning by retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor that America was at risk of slipping into a dictatorship

Clearly that is speculative, now wouldn't you agree? Before this could be anything other than speculative, we would have to see an elimination of the federal laws that govern the electoral process for selecting a president. Again, someone voicing their opinion is NOT evidence (and certainly not compelling evidence) that our society is under civil strife that would incite a civil war.

(4) the simple fact that the American populace is more viciously divided on political issues now than we've been at any time since the last Civil War.

This "simple fact" as you call it is simply wrong. Did you live thru the 60s? I did. And I'd bet Darby will also chime in here (as we have both discussed this fallacy before). NOWHERE in our nation today do you see the type of civil tension that we saw in the 60s. Protests against the Vietnam war were MUCH more numerous and much more well-attended (and much more violent) than the ones against the Iraq war today. I'm sorry, but you are simply incorrect in this statement, as the civil strife during the 60s was the time when "the American populace is more viciously divided on political issues" at "any time since the last Civil War".

The divergence between his timeline and our own was supposed to be about 2% in early 2001, and his effect on our timeline would have increased that diversion to some degree. We don't know how much.

This has also been addressed a great many times on this forum. One cannot use that 2% metric from Titor as any sort of valid measure because he never explained the scientific basis for how the percentage was measured (percentage of WHAT?). It was a convenient ruse to make people with weak scientific understanding think his science was valid. In reality, his science was bad pop-science, at best. Relying on this percentage of worldline divergence is worse than speculation, it is bad science.

I don't mean to be harsh, but these things have been addressed and dismissed (at least by thoughtful analysis) many times on this forum.
RMT

 

[Peter_Novak]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

Could you show me a Federal notice of contract award for this item, one which actually uses the words "concentration camps"?

No, but that’s a different issue entirely. The issue at hand is whether or not there are “signs” of a coming civil war, and most people would view the government’s decision to begin building internment camps on American soil as a damn big “sign” pointing in that direction. Of course, no reasonable person would expect America’s extraordinarily secretive government to openly admit building “concentration camps”, but they have admitted requisitioning $385 million worth of “temporary detention and processing facilities [for] emergencies [and] new programs” , which to my ears translates very exactly into “concentration camps” :

"SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- KBR, the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton Co, (HAL), said Tuesday it has been awarded a contingency contract from the Department of Homeland Security to supports its Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities in the event of an emergency. The maximum total value of the contract is $385 million and consists of a 1-year base period with four 1-year options. KBR held the previous ICE contract from 2000 through 2005. The contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to expand existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs, KBR said. The contract may also provide migrant detention support to other government organizations in the event of an immigration emergency, as well as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency, such as a natural disaster, the company said."

If we never heard any talk about detention, internment, or concentration camps inside the United States, the above press release might appear harmless, but if you’re waiting for the government to come right out and say "Hey, we're building concentration camps in America”, you just might end up inside one of those camps before the government ever came clean about it.

And why do we need to build more when (according to internet rumors for many years) FEMA has already been managing such "concentration camps" for years?

Well, internet rumors are one thing, and press releases about the government deciding it needs 385 million dollars worth of emergency detention facilities are quite another.

No matter how many millions of illegals there are in our country, you cannot technically count their opinions and/or dissentions about the debate over this problem towards a "civil war" for the simple fact that they are NOT citizens and as such they do not get to vote.

Oh, so you figure the next American Civil War will be fought in the voting booths?

Now, we might start a war (not civil) AGAINST the illegal aliens, but that would be something totally different

My guess is that if large scale hostilities broke out on American soil over the immigration issue, there would probably be American citizens on both sides, which would make it a Civil War after all.

(As an aside, I find the TIMING of this new push to make illegal immigration a mainstream issue particularly revealing. The US military is stretched to its extreme limits in Iraq and Afghanistan, and desperately needs new recruits. Yet at the same time, recruitment numbers are down dramatically, and right when the military is reportedly considering yet another campaign in Iran. People everywhere have been wondering how America can possibly hope to start a new conflict in Iran when we are already so hopelessly undermanned. Well, the problem is quite simple. The military needs more people, and the nation has millions of illegal aliens whose status in the country is vulnerable. I could easily imagine an offer of amnesty being offered to illegal aliens who volunteer to sign up for a two-year tour in the military. This plan would kill two birds with one stone, solving both the recruitment problem and the illegal alien problem, while avoiding the political suicide of drafting American citizens. Oh, and the concentration camps? They might be intended for those aliens who do not agree to be drafted into the military. And oh, about that Civil War -- it's alot easier to get a Civil War going, and have the military fight against the citizenry, when the military is composed of soldiers who are not native to that country. If I recall, I think Rome learned that the hard way. Perhaps we will as well. Time will tell.)

Clearly "the recent shocking warning by retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor that America was at risk of slipping into a dictatorship" is speculative, now wouldn't you agree?

No. I would not dismiss the considered opinion of a United States Supreme Court justice about the health of the United States government as mere speculation, but would instead deem it worthy of serious consideration, and would surely view her decision to voice such concerns in public as a definite “sign” that America’s government might be in serious trouble.

the simple fact that the American populace is more viciously divided on political issues now than we've been at any time since the last Civil War.

This "simple fact" as you call it is simply wrong. [...] NOWHERE in our nation today do you see the type of civil tension that we saw in the 60s. Protests against the Vietnam war were MUCH more numerous and much more well-attended (and much more violent) than the ones against the Iraq war today.

Wrong. The nation as a whole is FAR more politically divided today than it was in Nixon’s era. The protests were certainly more sensational back then, but that was due to an unusually vocal minority who were pissed about the draft. The fact is that in the 1972 election, Nixon won every state except Massachusetts, while the 2000 and 2004 elections were almost dead-even ties.

One cannot use that 2% metric from Titor as any sort of valid measure because he never explained the scientific basis for how the percentage was measured (percentage of WHAT?).

Apples and oranges. It’s not a QUESTION of using the number as a measuring tool, but as a simple weathervane, an indicator of the existence and direction of change. He said that some divergence would exist as soon as he got here, and it would increase more after that.

- Peter

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: John Titor is a fraud - here\'s a brief reason

Peter,

I am not going to continually debate you on items when we both seem to have a different definition of what "speculation" means. I prefer to use the dictionary definition: "Reasoning based on inconclusive evidence; conjecture or supposition." To show you what I mean:

No. I would not dismiss the considered opinion of a United States Supreme Court justice about the health of the United States government as mere speculation, but would instead deem it worthy of serious consideration, and would surely view her voicing such concerns in public as a definite “sign” that America’s government might be in serious trouble.

All you say is fine, but it is not in concert with the definition of speculation. Is her "definite sign" conclusive evidence? Indeed, has she even clearly stated her evidence alongside her concerns? If so, please quote it for us here so we can ascertain if it is conclusive, and devoid of conjecture or supposition. Moreover, do you have a clear understanding of her motivations or intentions for sharing this (yes) speculation?

No, but that’s a different issue entirely. The issue at hand is whether or not there are “signs” of a coming civil war

No, the issue at hand are your examples, and the fact that I have rightfully branded them as speculative. It is hardly a "different issue entirely" if it was the sum and substance of one of your examples for why we are likely on the verge of civil war. Here, let me show you just how speculative it is to use this as "evidence" that the intention is to use these detainment camps for a civil war:

If we never heard any talk about detention, internment, or concentration camps inside the United States, the above press release might appear harmless, but if you’re waiting for the government to come right out and say "Hey, we're building concentration camps in America”, you just might end up inside one of those camps before the government ever came clean about it.

First of all, I hope you can clearly see in your own words how you set-up speculation ("if we never heard any talk about detention..."). Now let me show you my own speculation that works to counter yours for this issue: Since our government is clearly beginning to engage the illegal alien issue, most of us who are staying apprised of all the issues surrouning the main issue are aware of something being talked about called AMNESTY for current illegal aliens who are living and working here. Since our governmental legislative affairs are debated in the open, such that the public has a record of what is going on and what laws are passed and when they may become effective, it is reasonable and prudent to SPECULATE that if amnesty were agreed to be part of a bill that became law, that there would be a date after which amnesty would not be applicable to illegal residents who are already here. Such a date would be part of the public record of the subject legislation WELL before the law went into effect. It is easy to see (and speculate) that this could easily lead non-residents who are poised at or near the border, who have been considering crossing illegally, to suddenly FLOOD THE BORDER and overwhelm any attempt to capture them and turn them back. Now I would simply call it prudent planning that if something like this does come to pass, that we should be prepared for such a flood, and part of that preparation would be to have a place to temporarily hold illegal immigrants before they could be re-naturalized back to Mexico.

Now, where we seem to differ is that I admit that my reasoning for this contract is certainly speculative, and indeed if the planning is as I suggest the planning itself is speculative. However, you seem to wish to use it as established fact that these camps would be used for detaining people in some fabled civil war.

Well, internet rumors are one thing, and press releases about the government deciding it needs 385 million dollars worth of emergency detention facilities are quite another.

The point is, the internet rumors are clearly speculation, just as is your ASSUMED use for these detention facilities.

The fact is that in the 1972 election, Nixon won every state except Massachusetts

Ummmm....does the word "Watergate" mean anything to you? Does the fact that this represented clearly criminal activities possibly taint that election? And if not, then why was Nixon finally forced to resign?

Apples and oranges. It’s not a QUESTION of using the number as a measuring tool, but as a simple weathervane, an indicator of the direction of change. He said that some divergence would exist as soon as he got here, and it would increase more after that.

No, Peter, they are not apples and oranges. And while I may be meek in debating you on other issues, I am simply NOT going to allow you to debase the fundamentals of science. Do you happen to have credentials or a background in science and/or engineering? If so, I would wonder how you could so easily ignore the fundamental basis for any relative percentage measure? ANY percentage used as a means to imply difference between any two phenomenon is CLEARLY being used as a measuring tool. In fact, that is ALL a percentage is intended to be used for....to compare relative numerical differences between two physical phenomenon. Furthermore, you example of a "weathervane" is a poor choice for an analogy, and I will now point out why. A weathervane is clearly subject to, and can be described by, physical aerodynamic and mechanical forces that can be mathematically, and accurately described with percentage measures. For example, I can subdivide the circle around which a weathervane rotates into 360 degrees. That 360 degrees represents 100% of the arc that the weather vane can turn to indicate a direction of change.

Now then, I want you to seriously consider the scientific and mathematical differences between the weather vane and Titor's undefined 2% worldline divergence metric. If you do, you will note that NEVER did Titor EVER accurately describe what physical measurement this 2% is based upon. IOW, he never said "100% of this worldline divergence represents a measure of gravity equivalent to the total gravitational constant of the earth's mass." Nor did he ever state any form of quantification of what represents 100% on his scale.

As I said above, I am not going to debate you about things that are clearly speculation. But I will never cease to dog you on scientific issues such as this. You are flat-out wrong in your assessment, and blind acceptance, of Titor's worldline divergence as a valid metric for any type of "indicator of direction of change." And I am quite confident that all my bretheren in the science and engineering disciplines would agree with me, and disagree with you.

Peter, I know you are an author, and I think the two of us could find an awful lot of common ground on spiritual topics. You might even find some of my own postings on this forum with regard to how scientific principles (forces, energy, and information) can be applied to showing how our spiritual components of being obey laws of physics. But I do not agree with your application of scientific principles in this matter, and your consideration of Titor's 2% worldline divergence metric is on scientifically shakey ground. Based on what I have read so far, I do not think you could possibly win a scientifically-founded debate with me on issues related to Titor without resorting to speculation.

Rather, I would encourage the two of us to explore areas of common interest and agreement with respect to the application of science to define the physical precepts of spirituality. Deal?

RMT