Time Travel verses the Paranormal

I have never said I applied the scientific method in coming to the conclusion that god is real.
Click to expand...

That isn't and has never been the question. No honest scientist will discount the possibility that God is real.

But they are scientists. They deal with the realm of what can be observed and put to the test of the scientific method. In so doing they don't discount the possibility that there is an entity that created our universe. But from their investigations they do conclude that whomever was responsible for creating our universe did so by allowing for a creation event that was subject to logic, rational thought and understanding and that in its deepest details (God) is hidden from our ability to investigate them. In other words, we have a universe that is logical, allows for God but doesn't allow for us to find God in the details. No problem. God has a sense of humor as well as a sense of mystery and mysticism "He" wants us to fathom the mystery of what he created but in doing so he doesn't allow us to know "the rest of the story". I can live with that.
 
I was wondering what would happen to a dedicated scientist who strickly follows the scientific method and he sees a ufo land in his backyard and then it disappears on him leaving absolutley no evidence behind at all. Does he close his eyes and repeat over and over "I refuse to believe what I just saw its not scientifically possible!! No I refuse to believe!! NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!"
And then he runs into a wall and hits his head and blacks out and then when he wakes up is relieved because he now thinks it was a dream and he is ok now because he doesn't have to apply the scientific method?
Click to expand...

you totally rool dood! :D
 
Of course not. But by the exact same token, you do not jump to a conclusion that cannot be supported. Acknowledging you have had an experience is one thing. Concluding it was one thing (that you might wish to believe) over some other thing (that might be more mundane) is a whole different story. That is precisely why the scientific method is not flawed: It does NOT try to explain things that cannot be repeatibly demonstrated. Science is patient.
Click to expand...

that just made science very unappealing to me. then again, im a balls to the wall type 'o fella.

this world is like bizzaro-land to me, i swear.

my theory is that god didnt make the tower of babel, he made egos. and thats the true test. how does man overcome their egos, in unison, to achieve a goal? methinks martin luther king had a shot at it, but some prick with an ego had to ruin it. bullocks i say!

seriously, i can lay out a perfect plan all day, every day, but folks dont want to play follow the leader. they dont want to walk 40 days and nights through the desert for their cookie, but they sure do want that cookie...

...and then try to eat said cookie with their toenail.
 
I can see the cake smelling at your face
I can see their faces running at your places
Please run out back to the badger
And hide out with the hasher
Please lie deep down low until it blows over

I'm sorry, my mind just broke

/ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
It cant prove or disprove time travel.
Click to expand...

Whether there are multiple time-lines or not, to state that science can't prove or disprove time travel is too broad of a proclaimation. To be able to prove or disprove any number of individual time travel claims is entirely different. With regards to the claims of being a time traveler, I stand with Rainman and Darby on that issue, and agree with them that those CAN BE either proven or disproven through science.

IF someone makes the claim of coming from the future, then in such a case, it IS up to the claimant to prove their claim. IF they describe their machine, and it is physically impossible, as per the Laws of Physics, Aerodynamics, etc, etc ; THEN there is a problem of fact verses fiction.

IF they provide a list of "predictions"...and those don't come to pass, or as Rainman said, start trying to proclaim success as they attempt to "fit square peg's in a round hole"; then throw down some sort of time-line variance percentage factorization as a reason why their predictions didnt come to pass...then some of us apply our own variance percentage factorization to the claim...and the scale starts with a Zero and runs to None.

Relative to ghosts, as I said, with some instances, I simply don't know. But this isn't so with every single instance, there are hundreds, if not thousands of supposed ghost stories that science has been able to de-bunk.

There is a reason as to why there is a Time Travel Claims section...whether the odds are any time traveler actually bothers to reveal themselves, isn't really relative to the creation of that Forum.

There is also a reason as to why there is a Paranormal Forum, as well. To the thinking person, there is a definitive difference between someone physically using a construct to traverse time and space verses someone sitting at a table with Tarot cards and claiming to be able to "see" into the future.

When I said that Science doesn't have ALL the answers to ALL of the experiences ; in no way is meant to detract from the value of science/engineering nor alleviate the necessity for educated and experienced scientists/engineers that maintain a rational perspective, and not be swayed by emotional responses.

As it is, I am with Rainman, Darby and a few others...that no "real" time travelers has come to TTI ( or have revealed themselves to date ), and the claims thus far have been "scientifically" disproven. That a time traveler might or might not arrive at some point in the future, to that possibility, I simply don't know.

The probabilities of one showing up and posting here at TTI, are against such an occurance, but one can always hope. Until then, every and all claimants of time travel should know that they will be expected to pony up some proof that can be validated, or be relagated to the science fiction category.
 
As an example :

Working for a door installation company, the "project engineers" are great at working up the details of a job from their offices. Going off blue-prints, they use their education and experience of mathematics to determine the specific details relative to the labor, expenses, and materials required to complete the project.

However, since they rarely visit the actual job site, it turns out that the doors don't fit into the elevators nor can be carried up the numerous flights of stairs to the upper floors of the building.

So, the field workers end up having to remove the windows of the designated rooms and using a construction elevator to lift the doors "up to" the upper floors of the building, and bringing them in through the openings of the windows.

Despite the knowledge of the project engineers, and the skill with working off the blue prints, physically visting the work site and experiencing the physical details in person would have prevented some costly mistakes, both in additonal expenses ( renting the construction elevator ) and labor.

However skilled you may be with aerospace engineering, does not replace the education of actually going out into the field for a length of time and experiencing events first hand.
Click to expand...

Indeed, just as one can apply the scientific method incorrectly, there is nothing to stop someone from applying the "laws" of engineering incorrectly. I know many engineers who behave as you have decribed here. In fact, I recall telling you about some of the problems I experienced, first-hand, with the engineering for my steel building in Colorado. The drawings called for a specific dimension between the steel beams used for posts and lintel for the windows. That dimension appeared to be incorrect.

But now let us talk about failure in the build process, because that happens just as often as failures in the engineering. The builder I had contracted decided to build-out ALL of the post & lintle structures for all 6 windows in my building before ever bothering to try and fit a window into them. It was only after all 6 framings were complete that he tried to fit a window and found the opening too large. Not too smart, huh? Prudence would cause one to build one of a repetitive structure first, to get the experience and make sure you are doing it correctly. Had he done that he may have been able to CALL THE ENGINEER on the first window installation and the engineer could have either corrected the drawings (which were NOT in error), or explain to the builder that the openings were correctly sized, and it was in the assembly of the window itself that additional steel standoff pieces are attached to the window, which are then used for holding the steel flashing that forms the window sill on the inside and outside of the window. But as it is, I had to settle for a screwed-up installation. Why? Not because the engineering was incorrect, but because the builder ASSUMED he knew how to build the windows, and did NOT call the engineer. So now I have six windows that are "buttressed" with wood 2x4s on the side and the top in order to make them fit into the steel structure. Pretty crappy, if you ask me. And all the builder had to do was call the engineer, whose name and number where right there on the drawings he was building to.

In my mind, any engineer who merely churns-out drawings, but never goes to see, work, and validate the final installation and operation of that which s/he has designed, is only a "partial engineer." How successful of a flight control engineer do you think I would be if I never visited, touched, tested or even flew the real airplane?

AAMOF, I have been spending more and more time in Palmdale over the last few months... visiting an airplane that contains quite fair amount of my designs. I have been doing what is called "integration"...where we assemble all the parts, subsystems, components, interfaces, software, hardware into what looks like an airplane ready to fly. But it shan't be deemed "ready to fly" until it passes all of its tests and checks. The aircraft I am speaking of is the X-47B... one of the few vehicles I work on that I can actually talk about, because it is a "white world" project. Keep an eye on the news... we should be ready for its first flight within 3-4 months from now, if all goes as planned. And if all does NOT go as planned, we fix the engineering, fix the vehicle, re-test and try again.

Collecting actual data on the actual "field site" is yet another aspect of the scientific method. Perhaps the most important, for it is in collecting data where we can compare it to what our theory predicts should be the case. And when theory does not match the real world data, there is obviously still more work to do. Sometimes the theory is wrong, but other times we find the theory is right and the people charge to assemble the engineer's work got it wrong.

Thanks for pointing this out, Kerr.
RMT
 
Anytime someone posts material that raises questions, then whomever has questions about what they have read, before coming to a conclusion, should use the Private Message feature here at TTI and ask for clarification of intent.

We all express ourselves differently, and because anyone might assume there is intent of ill-will, should ask the author if this was indeed so. In most cases, there isn't any intent of ill-will, but only an attempt to enlighten and educate from a different perspective.

Other than out-right and blatent offensive material, everyone who feels slighted should say so directly, and privately to the person they feel offended by, and to try and find why and where the other person is coming from before assuming the worst about anyone.
 
I wonder if edgar cayce came to your door would he know things about you or was all his ability just when he was asleep or hypnotised??
 
Whoops, when I said "you", didnt really mean "you = Rainman ". If it came out that way, I apologize.

I agree with everything you said in the latest post. Once upon a time, I had a customer who wanted to buy a well-pump to be used in Germany. Knowing that the electrical system is different in Europe than here in the U.S., I had to call the manufacturer to determine if the Well-Pump the customer had in mind to buy would be capable of working in a European system.

In this case, I didn't call the installers, nor the salespeople...but knew the "only" one capable of answering the question would be the person who designed the Well-Pump, the engineer.

In the case of the problem that you encountered in Colorado, it seems that there was failure at several points in the process. With what happened to you, seems that the same would have happened to others, as well. I am surprised that you didn't refuse the windows, and demand the appropriate sized windows to be ordered, as would be your right.

My wife is currently working for a window installer ( imagine that ! ), and many people would be surprised at how many times the installers go out to install the windows, to discover the windows don't fit. And as installers, they "will" try to install the windows, regardless of how, unless the customer discovers the problem and refuses to accept the in-appropriate windows.
 
Don't give up on science because of one person.
Click to expand...

im not giving up on it because of any one person. ray says that science is patient. well, we humans are not. we only have a very limited time on this earth, and to science, that equates to the bat of an eyelash.

Your post kind of worried me I was hoping you were ok.
Click to expand...

im always ok, no need to worry. i was just attempting to make a point. that point is that sometimes society works in reverse. there was a low-brow attempt at being witty somewhere in there too. guess it got lost in the translation.

 
Hmm...I posted this once but somehow it got erased.

Back to the subject "timetravel verses the paranormal"

If edgar cayce being a psychic sometimes got predictions wrong because he saw something in a wrong timeline or things changed because of something he said he was still considered a psychic.

Then why would a timetraveler no longer be considered a time traveler if he came from another timeline or things changed because of something he said?

I was wondering what the use of time travel would really be then? Or would it be enough to continue it because of the right predictions over the wrong ones? Such as in edgar cayce?
I guess we will find out when the time comes.
 
Hey Rainman,

Got another story to tell you, and since no one got injured, actually is kind of funny. I sometimes drove the truck to deliver the doors to the job sites, and was waiting across the street from a new building under construction while an air-conditioning system was being lowered via a helicopter onto the roof of the building.

Once the unit was placed onto the roof-top, and the straps were released, the air conditioner vanished from sight in a tremendous roar and cloud of dust.

Apparently, the air-conditioner was too heavy and not only fell through the roof, but we all could hear it falling through each and every floor, until it finally came to rest on the ground floor of the building.

Bet there were some red faces as a result of that incident.
 
but because it does not conform to your standards of testing only proves it is either unearthly or beyond mans (science) understanding.
Click to expand...

It proves nothing of a sort. The lack of evidence for the existence of extra-terrestrial "flying saucers" cannot be interpreted to mean that they exist. The lack of evidence simply means that they have not been detected. It does not rule out other possibilities but it offers no evidence at all that logically and rationally "proves" what such other possibilities might be or that they even exist.

If we were to delude ourselves into accepting that sort of evidence as proof of something then what sort of evidence might we also accept in, for example, a court of law? Fred is accused of murdering John. During trial no evidence is offered that shows the jury that Fred killed John. In closing the DA argues that the lack of evidence proves that Fred killed John using means either unearthly or beyond mans (science) understanding.

There's no real difference between the two arguments - yours and the DA's. Both reject rational standards of proof and jump to the same illogical conclusion - UFO's exist because we can't prove they exist and John killed Fred because we can't prove that he killed him (by accepted standards of proof as to both propositions).
 
LOL, Darby your tactics amuse me :D

Maybe you should be an attorney or politician if you like to take half statements and present them as a full representation of what somebody stated.

The statement which you quoted was followed by:
until a flying saucer lands on the white house lawn they will be nothing more than a docudrama on the science fiction channel
Click to expand...

and was in reference to the fact that at this point in time, paranormal experiences people claim to have, just as UFO claims can NOT be substantiated at this point in time using the scientific method because of repeatability issues, but that it also does NOT rule out the possibility in the future.

As to the courts in the US, I wouldn't put it past some attorneys to try exactly what you suggested...lol
 
Maybe you should be an attorney or politician if you like to take half statements and present them as a full representation of what somebody stated.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, it was a presentation not of a half statement but a complete synopsis of your position given the totality of the context of all the posts on the thread. Your position clears appears to be, based on the context of the thread, that lack of proof equates to the presence of proof.
 
On the contrary, it was a presentation not of a half statement but a complete synopsis of your position given the totality of the context of all the posts on the thread. Your position clears appears to be, based on the context of the thread, that lack of proof equates to the presence of proof.
Click to expand...

Actually I have said no such thing. We can go back and forth forever if you would like, but what my clear position has always been, and will forever be is that these are my own personal BELIEFS, that there are some things which can at this time neither be proven nor disproven by science. That given this science, should not pass something as fact if it has not been disproven. I believe you addressed this in your rant about paying to much in taxes. In normal American mathematics 2+2=4, that is a fact. That people have or do not have paranormal abilities is not.

Ohhh...which reminds me

It is the actual tax paying public that funds these projects. Spending money for to-date failed experiments becomes a matter of public policy and not a subject of the whim of alt-sci opinion
Click to expand...

I'm sure glad drug makers don't stop looking for cures for diseases after a test drug fails. I'm pretty sure the Government pours money into grants for them. I guess you prefer the government funding research such as the 1.2 million dollar study on the mating preferences of woodchucks, or the 1.4 million dollar study on why people don't ride their bikes to work? You know, the ones where they can actually work with things that cooperate with them.

Like I said though, who am I to judge, and if you Want to hold these as your beliefs , then more power to you.
 
This will be my last post to time travel institute. Its time for me to move on.... permanently this time.

Goodluck to everyone.
There were a few people I made friends with here and I will always be thankful for that.
You know who you are. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Sincerely,
Pamela
 
In the case of the problem that you encountered in Colorado, it seems that there was failure at several points in the process. With what happened to you, seems that the same would have happened to others, as well. I am surprised that you didn't refuse the windows, and demand the appropriate sized windows to be ordered, as would be your right.
Click to expand...

Yup. But as always, there are many factors at work in any problem. The contractor decided to walk away from the job before the roof was on and the garage door was installed. He must have clearly seen he could not complete the job within the $ value he had bid (and his signature was on a contract with that $ amount). Meanwhile, I was staring down the oncoming winter with no roof and not even 4 complete walls.

It would be very difficult to convince a contractor who has already walked away to tear-down the windows (esp. since the exterior steel wall cladding was already in place behind them). The funny part is that this contractor thought he was going to sue me for the last $1000 I held back for completion! He actually filed suit in Montezuma County Court against me. Clearly, he was bluffing and I did not need a lawyer to tell me that, but I paid one for advice anyway. So I countersued, and I showed-up for court on the designated day. Surprise, surprise... he called me the day before court just as I got into town. I decided to let it roll to voicemail. Seems NOW he wanted to try and work things out. Too late. We are headed to court. Another surprise: He did not show. Judge dismissed case against me. Told me that I would have to re-file against him if I wanted to pursue. While I should have done so, I did not have time, much less spare $, to monkey around with a guy who has performance issues.

I immediately brought in a new contractor, and told him to leave the windows as-is, and just get the roof on, the garage door installed, and the building closed for the winter. As it turns out he went the extra mile to build the steel cladding around the windows per the drawings. So even though the cheesy wood 2x4s are still installed, at least the windows are properly sealed from the weather.

I was able to extract some monetary compensation from the steel building company, even though there was nothing wrong with their drawings. Apparantly, the contractor who walked away had contacted them asking them to join his lawsuit against me! (Can you believe that?) They knew he had no chance in hell, so I guess they decided throwing some good will money at me was not bad insurance to protect them against future legal actions.

Such decisions are never easy. And some people thought I should have gone after the original contractor for "everything he's got." Well, he ain't got much, because he has built up a reputation in the courts for filing these kinds of "scare them" lawsuits, and regularly not showing up when his target decides to go to court instead of settle with him. He will suffer more from his own reputation than I could ever extract from him in a court of law.

RMT
 
Back
Top