Looking for John Titor

Gravity doesn't bend light. Distorted gravity also contains distorted light.

The picture is a fake. It is intended to be exposed as a fake. Just like the Civil Defense equipment.

But the fakes are made to mimic the real thing. This creates subconscious belief and conscious denial.

 
As I keep stating, I am not scientifically minded at all. From what I can remember at school, light is made up of photon's. Photon's have a velocity and mass. Gravity affects mass. I don't quite understand what you mean when you say that gravity doesn't even bend light at all?
Click to expand...
You're not entirely correct. A photon is supposed to be a massless particle by definition. And I believe it was historically recorded that Einstein is the one responsible for instilling the notion that gravity bends light.But if you have the time to watch the video I posted, then you will see that there is an alternate interpretation concerning how light is bent around our sun. Which Einstein originally asserted was caused by gravity.
Edward Dowdye talks about the suns plasma atmosphere being responsible for the apparent bending of light around our sun. This bending causes a lensing effect which would be exactly like the lensing effect we see everyday here on earth with both the sun and the moon as each body comes close to the horizon. The only thing different with this interpretation is that it is something that could be verified here on earth in a controlled laboratory environment. So Edward Dowdye's interpretation can be supported by verifiable facts. As opposed to Einstein's interpretation which only has theory to back it up.

Now up until I saw the above video, I always believed light can be bent by gravity. I was taught that in school. But in light of this new interpretation, I have to say that I am willing to change my belief. Only because real facts can be used.

That also is something I noticed. Many people don't seem to understand that a fact is something real and tangible. You don't need blind faith to accept a fact.

This reminds me of when I was a kid. It was Christmas eve. Very late at night. I was in bed. Really excited about getting up the next morning. So excited that I couldn't fall asleep. So I just lay there waiting. Later on I here noise coming from the living room. I sneak out of my room and get my sister. We both watch just out of view as my father starts bringing in presents from the trunk of his car. That's when I discovered that Santa Claus wasn't real. But it seems to be a belief that parents instill in small children to this day.

 
The B. Titor is all a mystery to me. A guy in my Army unit has the last name of Barrett. He is an intel guy, not a pilot.
Click to expand...
Gravity doesn't bend light. Distorted gravity also contains distorted light.The picture is a fake. It is intended to be exposed as a fake. Just like the Civil Defense equipment.But the fakes are made to mimic the real thing. This creates subconscious belief and conscious denial.
Click to expand...
Interesting. So from your perspective the photos were intended to be exposed as fake, and disbelief was desirable.... On the one hand that gives jt a convenient cop out, but on the other hand, it makes logical sense. Interesting indeed.
 
Edward Dowdye talks about the suns plasma atmosphere being responsible for the apparent bending of light around our sun. This bending causes a lensing effect which would be exactly like the lensing effect we see everyday here on earth with both the sun and the moon as each body comes close to the horizon.
Click to expand...
Ok, could we not create plasma and mimic the atmosphere of the sun? According to what I am reading, plasma is possible to make.
 
Ok, could we not create plasma and mimic the atmosphere of the sun? According to what I am reading, plasma is possible to make.
Click to expand...
Yes. That's why I mentioned we could verify this type of interpretation in a laboratory setting. As far as I know, most mediums that transmit light have an index of refraction. So the index of refraction can be determined in a laboratory setting just to see if this interpretation is valid. So what appears to be happening with the sun, is that the suns atmosphere acts like the outer edge of a lens. It bends light that passes through it due to the index of refraction. That does seem like a reasonable explanation to me. The bending of light allows us to see stars that are actually behind the sun.Since we see this type of lens effect everyday on earth when either the sun or moon are close to the horizon. It does suggest to me that the light we see, which does make the sun or moon appear larger, might also suggest that the sun or the moon may already be past the horizon. Our atmosphere on earth acts like a giant lens to produce this effect. So it's not that hard for me to expect to see this type of phenomena around any celestial body that possesses an atmosphere.
But this interpretation is in conflict with what is taught in school. The schools teach us that gravity is what causes light to bend around the sun. This is just like me seeing my dad bringing in the Christmas presents. What we see, and what we are being told aren't the same thing. And what we see appears to be the truth.

As for the John Titor laser picture? Well I believe someone attached a fiber optic cable to the end of a pen laser to reproduce the same type of photo Titor had. So what it appears is that Titor is using the scientific community explanation that gravity bends light to account for the light bending in his photo. Now that we have caught the scientific community misdirecting us away from the truth, it stands to reason that Titor may not have known that gravity does not bend light. Thus exposing his representation of the laser picture as being an entirely fictional claim. And casting doubt on the rest of his story as well.

 
But this interpretation is in conflict with what is taught in school. The schools teach us that gravity is what causes light to bend around the sun. This is just like me seeing my dad bringing in the Christmas presents. What we see, and what we are being told aren't the same thing. And what we see appears to be the truth.
Click to expand...
But what you witnessed was only a partial truth. Saint Nicholas WAS real. He was an old man that supposedly delivered money to the poor (or something similar). Same with Titor. We're not "seeing" the entire story...the true part of the story... I'm not trying to convince you. Just sayin'.... Who is Titor REALLY???? Could he not be a real time traveler with a false story attached,like Santa?
 
Who says the box was made from tin? Is that a statement everyone is claiming that jt made, or your own deductions from examining the pictures he posted?Q: "What type of system is used to maintain the singularity?"A: "I am not a physicist so I cannot answer that to your level of sophistication. The singularities are held in an enclosed magnetic field."
Click to expand...
Ok I said tin I believe it was thin sheet steel. Yes going by the photos and diagrams put up on another forum.
 
Oh my.... I got busy with my children and come back to strange conversations in here..... Um...I just wanted to pop in and share this link. This isn't the same man who holds the titor tt patent is he? North Portland man, 43, pleads guilty in drugging, abusing women | OregonLive.com
Click to expand...
Pohlman certainly seems to have something to do with the whole thing as it is his drawings (from his patent application)which have been reprinted as "explaining" how JT's time machine works, although it shows nothing workable, no circuit diagrams, no power supply...

 
But what you witnessed was only a partial truth. Saint Nicholas WAS real. He was an old man that supposedly delivered money to the poor (or something similar). Same with Titor. We're not "seeing" the entire story...the true part of the story... I'm not trying to convince you. Just sayin'.... Who is Titor REALLY???? Could he not be a real time traveler with a false story attached,like Santa?
Click to expand...
I would have to say no. The reason being is that we are all victims of our educational system. A system that has brainwashed us into creating explanations for things that we don't understand. But apparently the rules for creating those explanations are being left out. But there appears to be a preference for making something up as opposed to looking for a real fact based explanation.Why do you believe Saint Nicholas was real?
Why do you believe Titor could be a real time traveler?

Do you have any real facts, or hard core evidence to sway you to believe this way?

I do realize that you might not understand that there has to be some type of verifiable reality to an explanation. But in many cases those types of explanations just aren't available. And our educational system made us this way. To me it appears to be a system that works by keeping everybody effectively stupid. A way to control the masses. I think this is something you have to figure out on your own. I've had no luck at all in trying to show people what's going on. Apparently the educational system is much better at getting us to accept false beliefs mostly without question.

 
But what you witnessed was only a partial truth. Saint Nicholas WAS real. He was an old man that supposedly delivered money to the poor (or something similar). Same with Titor. We're not "seeing" the entire story...the true part of the story... I'm not trying to convince you. Just sayin'.... Who is Titor REALLY???? Could he not be a real time traveler with a false story attached,like Santa?
Click to expand...
Paula,Go back and read the posts. By that I don't mean read Pamela's posts that she attributes to Titor. I mean read the posts made by TTO and JT. There's really not much there. It's 142 posts. Take away all the "I don't care if you believe me" quibbling crap posts. What's left?
If I believe your CV that you include in your profile then you have a solid physical science background. Toss out all of the Titor shit and just look at the facts that he posted. When looking at the facts toss out his amazing brain exposition that "E = mc^2" and "ds^2 = sqrt (-ct^2 + x^2 + y^2 + z^2)" college introductory relativistic physics and ask yourself, "Did he actually say anything that we don't already know?" Look deeper than the surface. Look at the topics being discussed on the forums during and for a year before he started posting. Was there really anything new or even original?

 
Now I'll give you my not-so-surprising answer to my own questions:

Titor has been given the online mystique of being some sort of genius. In reality maybe Boomer is some sort of genius. But based on his posts he is just an ordinary person not given of any information that we don't already have. His knowledge of physics, as exhibited in his posts, is lower division introductory physics for non physical science majors, i.e. - the undergrad physical science requirement for social science majors.

There's nothing, absolutely nothing, in Titor's posts that indicates that he had any sub-surface understanding of the physical laws of nature. What was apparent was his understanding of how alt-sci forums work and how to feed pearls to swine (no disrespect intended to the swine).

 
Now I'll give you my not-so-surprising answer to my own questions:Titor has been given the online mystique of being some sort of genius. In reality maybe Boomer is some sort of genius. But based on his posts he is just an ordinary person not given of any information that we don't already have. His knowledge of physics, as exhibited in his posts, is lower division introductory physics for non physical science majors, i.e. - the undergrad physical science requirement for social science majors.There's nothing, absolutely nothing, in Titor's posts that indicates that he had any sub-surface understanding of the physical laws of nature. What was apparent was his understanding of how alt-sci forums work and how to feed pearls to swine (no disrespect intended to the swine).
Click to expand...
I double maj. and have a BA in social science and I was not req. to take any physics...I am not disagreeing with your entire position, just this one point.
 
I double maj. and have a BA in social science and I was not req. to take any physics...I am not disagreeing with your entire position, just this one point.
Click to expand...
I wasn't indicating physics as a core requirement for a social science major. I was indicating a physical science (physics, chem, geology, etc.) requirement. The requirement vary state to state in the US but when I was an undergrad all students in the University of California schools had to take at least (non major level): 1 year of physical science, 1 year of biological science, 1 year of calculus, 1 semester of social science stats and 1 year of a foreign language for a BA degree. All social scientists should have come away with a basic level of understanding of university level science and math.I was an experimental psychology major with emphasis on experimental design. That was a BS degree program rather than a BA in psychology and the requirement for math, physical science (esp. chemistry and pharmacology) and biological science (esp. human physiology and neuro-pharmacology) was "somewhat" more than the other psychology programs. :)

 
Ok, could we not create plasma and mimic the atmosphere of the sun? According to what I am reading, plasma is possible to make.
Click to expand...
We make plasmas all the time. A plasma is just a state of matter where the atoms are all ionized - electrons are stripped off - and they form a sort of gas. Neon lights and florescent tube lights glow because the plasma is excited by an electric current running through it.You make the plasma by exciting the electrons beyond their binding energy state - the energy required to keep them bound to the atom. It they are energized to a high enough state they jump up to and off the highest orbital. Viola! Plasma.
Have we recreated the sun plasma on Earth? Sure - many times. And on a large scale. Every fission bomb and fusion bomb every detonated created a plasma far more energetic (per surface area) than the sun. Every such bomb ever detonated output, for a brief moment, more energy than was received over the entire Earth from the sun during that period of time. When you see a film of an atomic or hydrogen bomb detonating you are looking at the plasma (the fire ball). The surface temperature of the sun is about 5770 degrees. The surface temperature of a nuclear bomb is 10's of million degrees. It not only recreates the surface it also recreates the core of the sun (a somewhat loose description - the precise nuclear interactions are quite different than in the sun).

 
But this interpretation is in conflict with what is taught in school. The schools teach us that gravity is what causes light to bend around the sun. This is just like me seeing my dad bringing in the Christmas presents. What we see, and what we are being told aren't the same thing. And what we see appears to be the truth.
Click to expand...
You're at it again - giving half an answer to a legitimate question and extending it to the general answer.Not "some" but all matter has an Index of Refraction. If you can "see" it, i.e. the stuff interacts with light, then it has an Index of Refraction. When looking at stellar lensing that is taken into account. That's half the answer because it does not account for the total lensing. General Relativity accounts for the otherwise unaccounted for portion of the curvature of the light. This is the science as taught in the schools that I attended.
You're always referring to what is taught in school and getting it wrong. Where the heck did you go to school where they taught this nonsense?

 
But what you witnessed was only a partial truth. Saint Nicholas WAS real. He was an old man that supposedly delivered money to the poor (or something similar). Same with Titor. We're not "seeing" the entire story...the true part of the story... I'm not trying to convince you. Just sayin'.... Who is Titor REALLY???? Could he not be a real time traveler with a false story attached' date='like Santa?[/b'] 
Click to expand...
Here's the big difference and why the answer to the bold text is no. St. Nicholas lived 1700 years ago and no one alive today or for the past hundred generations had a conversation with him. The difference is that there are several people on this site who had conversations (albeit through posts) with Titor. The entire text of the conversations in its original form, without any edits, is available. We know exactly what Titor said in his own words. There's no legend behind the words; they speak for themselves. 


Caveat: Several of us tend to be skeptical to some degree a good portion of what is attributed to Titor because it did not come onto the forum in its original text. A good deal of posts attributed to Titor were actually posted by Pamela via what she said were private email conversations between them. In those cases we consider the possibility of the unreliable (biased) narrator effect. Titor neither confirmed nor denied that those posts were complete, unedited or even his words. We do know that Pamela did say that she edited portions of the emails. What we don't know is what and to what extent she edited them.

 
Paula,Go back and read the posts. By that I don't mean read Pamela's posts that she attributes to Titor. I mean read the posts made by TTO and JT. There's really not much there. It's 142 posts. Take away all the "I don't care if you believe me" quibbling crap posts. What's left?If I believe your CV that you include in your profile then you have a solid physical science background. Toss out all of the Titor shit and just look at the facts that he posted. When looking at the facts toss out his amazing brain exposition that "E = mc^2" and "ds^2 = sqrt (-ct^2 + x^2 + y^2 + z^2)" college introductory relativistic physics and ask yourself, "Did he actually say anything that we don't already know?" Look deeper than the surface. Look at the topics being discussed on the forums during and for a year before he started posting. Was there really anything new or even original?
Click to expand...
I have an interest in science. I am not a physicist and never claimed to be.
 
Back
Top