Author |
Topic: John Titor (Read 22262 times) |
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender: 
Posts: 13730
|
 |
Re: John Titor
« Reply #25 on: Feb 19th, 2004, 6:38am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Okay then, suppose you put a rope through..
you feed it in at one feet per minute, and it comes out on the other side at one feet per minute. You start right after the rocketship takes off, and it lands a year later.
Now you've fed in a years worth of rope, and they only extracted, say, an hour's worth. If you tied anything to the rope, it would still take about a year to get out of the other end.
|
|
 IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
John_Gaughan
Uberpuzzler
Behold, the power of cheese!
    
 
Gender:
Posts: 767
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #26 on: Feb 19th, 2004, 7:51am » |
Quote Modify
|
I think the rope would come out at the same speed, relative to Earth. I.e. on Earth they would feed it in at one foot per minute, a lesiurly pace. On the spaceship, however, it would shoot out at 8,760 feet per minute, or 99.9 miles per hour.
|
|
IP Logged |
x = (0x2B | ~0x2B)
x == the_question
|
|
|
KenYonRuKu
Full Member
Posts: 229
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #27 on: Feb 19th, 2004, 11:55am » |
Quote Modify
|
I think that the order of the day would be for me to sit down with a large drink and spend a careless evening with Lucy Liu...
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #28 on: Feb 19th, 2004, 6:22pm » |
Quote Modify
|
First of all, in answer to KenYonRuKu's question to me: No. I think a reading of my responses already should make clear that I do not believe it in the slightest.
Concerning wormholes: A conceptual - but as yet unproven - idea which has sadly been twisted into something far removed from any factual basis by popular culture.
There are considerable unknowns about wormholes (in addition to whether or not such exist). These include the question of how one manages to move one end of worm-hole. What happens when something passes through a worm-hole is another question. Mathematically, it depends on how the worm-hole is formed. Without knowing that (and we can't know that without a full description of the situation), it is impossible to say what happens to anything that passes through.
Another consideration: travelling backwards in time is equivalent to travelling faster than light. If you can do one, you can also do the other. In fact, what one observer sees as travelling faster than light, another observer will see as travelling backwards in time, and vice versa.
And another: According to our best theoretical knowledge, going backwards in time is possible. According to theory, if you spin a super-massive object, it twists space-time around itself in such a way that travelling near it opposite the spin will take you back in time. The amount of mass needed and the spin rate required are beyond anything we have any hope currently of ever being able to do. But even if possible, this time machine still cannot take you back to a time before it's creation.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
John_Gaughan
Uberpuzzler
Behold, the power of cheese!
Gender:
Posts: 767
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #29 on: Feb 19th, 2004, 8:52pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 19th, 2004, 6:22pm, Icarus wrote:| There are considerable unknowns about wormholes (in addition to whether or not such exist). |
|
I thought they were proven to exist, but only at a subatomic level. I do not have a link handy but I could swear I read this at one of the science news site.
on Feb 19th, 2004, 6:22pm, Icarus wrote:| Another consideration: travelling backwards in time is equivalent to travelling faster than light. If you can do one, you can also do the other. In fact, what one observer sees as travelling faster than light, another observer will see as travelling backwards in time, and vice versa. |
|
What about the infinite improbability drive? That travels faster than light but forward through time.
|
|
IP Logged |
x = (0x2B | ~0x2B)
x == the_question
|
|
|
Speaker
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1118
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #30 on: Feb 19th, 2004, 9:37pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I have two points. First, I was going to mention the traveling at the speed of light is equal to time travel. (but didn't have anything worthwhile to mention along with my lonely factoid.)
Now, the idea of spinning a massive object and then traveling in the opposite direction of its spin to travel back in time, well. Well, well well, isn't this what Superman did (does)? He had to save Lois and so flew West at the speed of light or maybe faster but anyway really reallllly fast.
Did the comic book writers know about this theory when they wrote the story, or were they just really ahead of their time?
|
|
IP Logged |
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. <Ben Franklin>
|
|
|
John_Gaughan
Uberpuzzler
Behold, the power of cheese!
Gender:
Posts: 767
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #31 on: Feb 20th, 2004, 5:42am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 19th, 2004, 9:37pm, Speaker wrote:Now, the idea of spinning a massive object and then traveling in the opposite direction of its spin to travel back in time, well. Well, well well, isn't this what Superman did (does)? He had to save Lois and so flew West at the speed of light or maybe faster but anyway really reallllly fast.
Did the comic book writers know about this theory when they wrote the story, or were they just really ahead of their time?
|
|
I doubt at the time the comic books were written that they knew about it, they probably thought "if Superman does something impossible, the improbable will happen, and people might accept it as plausible." That goes on quite a bit in books, movies, etc.
|
|
IP Logged |
x = (0x2B | ~0x2B)
x == the_question
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #32 on: Feb 20th, 2004, 9:58pm » |
Quote Modify
|
The "fly westward around the earth to go back in time" idea is based on a very flawed concept of what actually happens when you travel west. (If you are catching up with the sun, then the time of day is decreasing - that means you are going back in time, right?) To get the effect I mentioned, you need considerably stronger gravitation than found about earth (or the sun or any other uncollapsed object). I've never studied the math of this enough to understand it myself, but have heard it from several sources.
And for an object with mass, traveling at the speed of light is not equivalent to traveling back in time. Instead it is equivalent to being impossible! It is traveling faster than light that is equivalent to traveling back in time.
The existance of wormholes on a subatomic scale is a prediction of some of our best attempts to reconcile quantum mechanics and general relativity. These generally expect spacetime to be quite foamy at this level. However, we are very far from having any hard evidence that this is so. So no, I would not say that the existance of wormholes has been proven.
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 20th, 2004, 10:01pm by Icarus » |
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
 
Gender:
Posts: 2873
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #33 on: Feb 21st, 2004, 8:52am » |
Quote Modify
|
A more charitable interpretation of the "fly round the earth very fast to go back in time" effect is that it's a whole lot easier to keep track of the earth's location if you stick near it than if you fly straight out into space for a while then try finding your way back... Also, while it's been a while since I had a good handle on these things, wouldn't the relativistic mass increase mean that, from the point of view of the rapidly orbiting individual, the earth would be super-massive. Of course, once you get significantly above light speed, the apparent mass reduces again.
As far as FTL being equivalent to time travel: under relativity, time is divided not just into "past", "future" and an infinitesimal boundary "now", but into "causal past", "causal future", past and future boundary "light cones", the space-time point "here and now" and "elsewhere" - the collection of events, x, for which there exists an inertial frame in which x is simultaneous with "here and now". Ordinary sub-light travel moves you from "here and now", "causal future" or "future light cone" into "causal future", or from "elsewhere" or "past light cone" into "elsewhere", "future light cone" or "causal future" or from "causal past" to anywhere. FTL travel, without changing direction, can take you from "future light cone" or "causal future" to "future light cone", "causal future" or "elsewhere", or from "past light cone" or "causal past" to "past light cone", "causal past" or "elsewhere" or from "here and now" to "elsewhere" or from "elsewhere" to anywhere. Following through the possibilities, the only way to get into your own "causal past" is by taking an FTL trip to "elsewhere" and then another FTL trip into "causal past" - the transition between FTL trips happens automatically as soon as you accelerate, though you need to accelerate the right way to end up where you want to go rather than, for example, some distance into the future rather than the past.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
KenYonRuKu
Full Member
Posts: 229
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #34 on: Feb 21st, 2004, 8:52am » |
Quote Modify
|
Icarus, I wish you had been my physics teacher at school. And Speaker: your factoid is lonely, but in its own way lovely.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #35 on: Feb 21st, 2004, 9:19am » |
Quote Modify
|
rmsgrey - Your reasoning may be more charitable, but it is less accurate. I did not dream up my description. I have read it in those comic books!  My comic book reading days were in the 70s. At that time, DC & Marvel were selling reprinted additions of their early comics, as well as new works. Whether this is so anymore, I don't know. I stopped reading comics when it became clear that there were other things to spend my limited funds on that I enjoyed more. Anyway, from those early comics, I got to see the origins of many concepts such as this, that have since become comic book conventions. (Did you know that originally Superman was not able to fly? He was able to take amazing leaps into the air, but they were only leaps. However, as time went on, they kept depicting him in the air so much, the idea that he was leaping was quietly forgotten.)
As for the FTL - time travel connection. If you travel FTL, some observers will see it as traveling from their causal future directly to their causal past.
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 21st, 2004, 9:22am by Icarus » |
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2873
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #36 on: Feb 22nd, 2004, 9:35am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 21st, 2004, 9:19am, Icarus wrote:rmsgrey - Your reasoning may be more charitable, but it is less accurate. I did not dream up my description. I have read it in those comic books! My comic book reading days were in the 70s. At that time, DC & Marvel were selling reprinted additions of their early comics, as well as new works. Whether this is so anymore, I don't know. I stopped reading comics when it became clear that there were other things to spend my limited funds on that I enjoyed more. Anyway, from those early comics, I got to see the origins of many concepts such as this, that have since become comic book conventions. (Did you know that originally Superman was not able to fly? He was able to take amazing leaps into the air, but they were only leaps. However, as time went on, they kept depicting him in the air so much, the idea that he was leaping was quietly forgotten.)
|
|
My comic book reading days are admittedly more recent (I wasn't even born in the '70s) but I have read a fairly broad cross-section of time periods and second-hand comics (largely in anthologies). Ok, so my (hazy) recollection is that Superman travelled back in time in the story I remember simply by flying too fast in a straight line and found himself back on Krypton shortly before it exploded. I also have extremely hazy almost memories of Superman flying round the earth so fast that it reverses its rotation (under general relativity, a rapidly moving dense mass "drags" space time with it, causing nearby masses to get pulled along in the same direction). Besides, I suspect most people remember the flying westwards to reverse time from the movie rather than the comics, and we all know how reliable Hollywood is when it comes to making (comic) books into movies...
I not only remember Superman's original leaps (leap tall buildings in a single bound) but also an intermediate stage where he flew by kicking his legs at superspeed (a technique later adopted by the Flash) rather than the modern flying through sheer force of will.
Quote:
As for the FTL - time travel connection. If you travel FTL, some observers will see it as traveling from their causal future directly to their causal past. |
|
I suppose it depends on your definition of FTL - I'm assuming that FTL only covers travel that goes into the "future" from someone's point of view rather than going directly into your own causal past without acceleration. For any event in my causal future, regardless of the inertial frame used by an observer at that event, his causal past is always a superset of my causal past, so any travel that appears to go directly (without acceleration) from my causal future to my causal past from my perspective must appear to the traveller to be pure time-travel not just FTL travel. If you consider a Feynman space-time diagram, then all inertial frames agree on the angle of a photon's line (traditionally 45 degrees) and on which side of that angle a straight line connecting two events would be, but there is no consensus on which pairs of events are simultaneous (would be connected by a horizontal line) or in the same place (would be connected by a vertical line). My definition of FTL travel is any travel which, when plotted on a (4-dimensional) Feynman diagram has a gradient shallower than that of light. I don't count the time-reversal of normal sub-light travel as FTL, but rather as flat out time travel since it can only take you into your causal past in much the same way as normal sub-light travel can only take you into your causal future.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #37 on: Feb 22nd, 2004, 1:01pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 22nd, 2004, 9:35am, rmsgrey wrote:| I suspect most people remember the flying westwards to reverse time from the movie rather than the comics, and we all know how reliable Hollywood is when it comes to making (comic) books into movies... |
|
True, but then comic books are not exactly the best source for these ideas either. Generally, I rate various sources this way for scientific understanding (For the fictional sources, I do not require sticking to actual scientific theory - only that when current knowledge comes into play, they express matters in accordance to it):
Actual science
Hard science fiction (from writers such as Forward, Asimov, Brin, Niven, etc).
"Soft" science fiction (Writers such as McAffrey, Card, etc)
Comic books
The news media
The general public
Hollywood
Those who go ranting about "It's a proven scientific fact", or about "It's just a theory". Both show a horrendous misunderstanding of what science is.
Quote:| I not only remember Superman's original leaps (leap tall buildings in a single bound) but also an intermediate stage where he flew by kicking his legs at superspeed (a technique later adopted by the Flash) rather than the modern flying through sheer force of will. |
|
That one I missed. And obviously, it is a rather late addition for the Flash too, because when I was reading, he was earth-bound (or sub-earth: he was already doing the vibrating molecules thing).
Quote:| I suppose it depends on your definition of FTL - I'm assuming that FTL only covers travel that goes into the "future" from someone's point of view rather than going directly into your own causal past without acceleration. For any event in my causal future, regardless of the inertial frame used by an observer at that event, his causal past is always a superset of my causal past, so any travel that appears to go directly (without acceleration) from my causal future to my causal past from my perspective must appear to the traveller to be pure time-travel not just FTL travel. If you consider a Feynman space-time diagram, then all inertial frames agree on the angle of a photon's line (traditionally 45 degrees) and on which side of that angle a straight line connecting two events would be, but there is no consensus on which pairs of events are simultaneous (would be connected by a horizontal line) or in the same place (would be connected by a vertical line). My definition of FTL travel is any travel which, when plotted on a (4-dimensional) Feynman diagram has a gradient shallower than that of light. I don't count the time-reversal of normal sub-light travel as FTL, but rather as flat out time travel since it can only take you into your causal past in much the same way as normal sub-light travel can only take you into your causal future. |
|
If you can do FTL, as you defined it, you can also do time-travel as you defined it, and vice versa. That time-travel [bigto] FTL is fairly easy: You've planned a trip to Alpha Centauri, and announce before leaving that you will get there tomorrow. The crowd laughs at your stupid remark. Unbeknownst to them, as soon as you are behind the moon, you flip on your handy-dandy time machine and go back 4.3 years. Then you take off to nearly light-speed and make the 4.3 year trip in a single day of ship-time. Once there you send a radio signal back to earth. 4.3 years later, they receive your signal and are stunned when they calculate that you arrived at Alpha Centauri the day after you left earth.
So you made the 4.3 light-year trip in 1 day (both in your time & in their time). That definitely qualifies as FTL.
The converse is more technical, but it also holds true. I don't remember the specifics, though, and must consider it before proffering a description.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #38 on: Feb 22nd, 2004, 1:16pm » |
Quote Modify
|
y'know.. I just don't buy the whole travelling faster than light [equiv] time travel
I suppose I'm just to dense to understand why v=x/t > 0 and x > 0 doesn't have to mean t > 0
as for comic book physics, there was an article on sciencblog about that recently:
Uncanny physics of comic book superheroes
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 22nd, 2004, 1:17pm by towr » |
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #39 on: Feb 22nd, 2004, 1:50pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 22nd, 2004, 1:16pm, towr wrote:y'know.. I just don't buy the whole travelling faster than light [equiv] time travel
I suppose I'm just to dense to understand why v=x/t > 0 and x > 0 doesn't have to mean t > 0 |
|
Time travel and FTL are not equivalent because doing one IS doing the other, but rather they are equivalent because if you can do one, then you can also do the other. It simply a matter of arranging things right and making appropriate use of the theory of special relativity.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #40 on: Feb 22nd, 2004, 1:56pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Ah.. that makes more sense.. Thanx for clearing that up..
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2873
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #41 on: Feb 23rd, 2004, 6:45am » |
Quote Modify
|
Under special relativity, saying v>0 doesn't make a great deal of sense because v=0 is mostly a matter of opinion. The ones you can be sure of are v=c, v<c and v>c. For v<c, t>0 and t<0 are meaningful but for v>c, t is mostly a matter of opinion.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
D28_2012
Guest
|
Hey If your interested in John Titor you might want to join my yahoo group: -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/John_Titor_UK/
theres loads of links and pictures for you to check out and a message board.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Gavin_David
Guest
|
i think if you look at the length of this thread, do a search on google and check out how many sites are devoted to this guy, he has more than succeded in what he obviously wanted out of this - attention
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
KenYonRuKu
Full Member
Posts: 229
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #44 on: Apr 7th, 2004, 5:59pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Precisely, Gavin_David.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #45 on: Apr 7th, 2004, 8:20pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Definitely he has gotten far more attention than he deserves, but if you read through this thread, you will notice that really only about 1/4 of it deals with him and his claims.
The rest consists of discussions of time travel in general, and other topics suggested by his claims. But in these discussions, we generally have not dwelt much on his statements. Instead we have been discussing our own ideas.
So his bid for attention has not been completely successful here. We are more concerned with our own understandings than any claims of his.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
D28_2012
Guest
|
Hey If your interested in John Titor you might want to join my yahoo group: -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/John_Titor_UK/
theres loads of links and pictures for you to check out and a message board.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.
Gender:
Posts: 4863
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #47 on: Jun 4th, 2004, 11:40pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Apparently this guy trolls for threads about Johnny boy, and posts his invitation without checking them or keeping track of whether or not he has posted before. This is the only explanation of I can think of for this exact repeat 2 months later.
|
|
IP Logged |
"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2873
|
|
Re: John Titor
« Reply #48 on: Jun 5th, 2004, 6:57am » |
Quote Modify
|
That's not very imaginative of you then - I can think of several possibilities - all with negligible plausibility, admittedly, but still possible explanations...
For instance, he might have actually double-posted accidentally at the time, but one copy of the post just got lost in cyberspace, didn't time out for some reason, and arrived two months later. Or, by sheer coincidence, a very large number of charged particles all spontaneously moved in such a way as to generate a perfect duplicate of the post. Or the guy has got caught in a 2 month time loop, endlessly doomed to repeat the exact sequence of actions until something happens to break the loop (please ignore the problems of entropy and information exchange at the boundary of the effect). Or maybe it's someone else with the same online name, and claiming ownership of a Yahoo! club wiht the same name.
Of coure, the stupid troll (or maybe a robot troll) is much, much, much more plausible.
On the other hand, as we all know, a deja vu is a glitch in teh Matrix, caused when 'they' change something...
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
marycast
Guest
|
IMPORTANT NEWSFLASH from the International Alien Research Group.
Is there possibly another TIME TRAVELER on the planet or is this person just a really good QUANTUM REMOTE VIEWING TELEPORTED. We have found another we believe to be a time-traveler like John Titor, and he goes by the nickname Michi. Which some think could refer to the renowned prophet Nostradamus (Michel de Nostradame) who lived in St. Remy, Provence, France in the Sixteenth Century.
Many people in the United State and around the world are starting believe this person most be a TIME TRAVELER sent back in time since he is clearly different then anyone else on the planet. What he is doing and the way he talks is out of this world. He is been on the radio challenging United States Government, the CIA, FBI and NASA officials to call in on radio shows and debate him scientifically about several very disturbing thing. When they do call in to the talk show in an attempt to proof him wrong, this Micki is making them look like fools with some unusual advanced scientific reasoning.
For instance on one radio talk show we heard this Michi single handling debating a team of 3 NASA engineers that had called in on the talk show. For almost an hour these NASA engineers were trying to crucify this guy Michi.
However, through the entire show Michi who we think may be a TIME TRAVELER seemed to clearly put NASA on the offensive. He even got NASA to admit they had launching over 1,000 nuclear booms in outer space by accident. Then they quickly claimed its radiation fall-out would not return to earth. After that things really heated up and NASA started accusing MICHI of distributing highly classified government evidence and demanded to know where he got it from, and who was founding him. This was on the David Glover show in Missouri, United States.
Doesn’t that sound very strange, MICHI know stuff even the United States Government has admitted publicly they don’t know how or where he got it. This is the kind of stuff that leads us to believe this guy must be a TIME TRAVELER or a genuine REMOTE VIEWING TELEPORTED.
While visiting Florida we heard this MICHI claimed on another talk-show that there has already been over 2,100 nuclear bomb tested in outer space and the fall-out is destroying Earth’s protective ozone layer. He claimed that the nuclear testing which started in the year 1957 is the major cause for the major expansion of the 2 large holes in the ozone layer. He claims pollution is just a small part of the problem. MICHI claimed if the nuclear bomb testing were not stopped, soon it would be to late. He says in the future creature including humans’ will started developing cancer in the most horrible ways imaginable. Starting with the most vulnerable creatures like the Sea Turtles, the fish, and frogs. He claims surface creature life forms on Earth will be forced to live underground for possibly millions of years.
LISTED BELOW ARE A FEW OF THE OTHER CLAIMS MADE BY THIS TIME-TRAVELER NAMED MICHI:
He claims soon we will discover there was once an ancient planet between Earth and Jupiter. Michi claims this ancient planet was a lot like Earth but much bigger and full of life before a massive explosion destroyed it. All that’s left is its moon we call Planet Mars. Michi has provided some very powerful scientific evidence included complex mathematical formulas related to the creation of Earths Solar System, which confirms the possibility of the planet previous existence.
Michi predicted the war in the Middle East (Iraq) and claimed it would be conducted under false pretences, which could easily be referenced to finding no Weapons of Mass destruction. He predicted Billionaire George Soros would step forward to defeat George Bushes in the 2004 presidential election. Although George Soros is not running for president, he has mysteriously stepped forwards financially with an independent smear campaign to help defeat President Bush. And like many people in the scientific community these days, he also claims the United State Government faked the Apollo 11 moon landing back in the 1969’s. Hoping they could convince the Soviets Union they had much more powerful technology, which would in turn discourage any nuclear attack attempt. Michi has provides a great deal of advanced scientific evidence suggesting it is certainly possible the United States could have faked the moon landing and of they did their plan worked.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
RIDDLES SITE
WRITE MATH!
Home 
Help 
Search 
Members 
Login 
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print
Remove