@D34THBL0550M & @Apocalypse - I do hope that this little bit of arguing back and forth is over and done with. Otherwise, I might have to intervene again.
Now, I suggest the two of you at least agree to disagree for the sake of this thread, and the forum as a whole, starting now. Agreed?
@Classicalfan626 Nothing about this conversation should be taken as serious
I fully agree and if you notice I would like to keep discussing the science of time travel and multiverse travel.
That’s a very good answer, Apocalypse. I’m glad to hear it! 
That wouldn’t be fair, because as a civil forum, we moderators take all conversations seriously. That is, as long as they are public on this forum, and are not in private messaging. (We don’t get involved in private conversations between two or more users unless something in such conversations is reported, and that report is accepted by us as valid, which would force one of us to intervene. And that intervention would occur if the content of the report blatantly violates a forum rule or guideline.) Thank you.
Reported huh
Yes, that’s pretty much it.
But come to think of it, it just occurred to me that suspicious posts that are labeled as “reported” on other forum sites are equivalent to “flagged posts” on this one. Practically any user can flag a post for review if he/she considers it to be a violation of our rules and guidelines as a whole. We mods can either accept such a flag, taking the appropriate action, or reject it, with little or nothing to do to act on.
I do apologize if I confused you at all. I myself was mixed up with some previous setup(s) that this forum has had in the recent past. However, the opinion as stated in my last reply to this topic (above yours) remains unchanged for the most part. My mix-up between “reports” and “flagged posts” is the only exception.
Hmmm.
You know, if you’re here now and you travel 25 years into the future, if you make contacts then vanish from their timeline for 20 years… doesn’t matter where you go, 20 years will pass for both you and the observer. If you come back to the same exact time you did the first trip, you will have aged 20 years regardless… the aging process continues for you even if you skipped a million years of time… the only way to slow that is to reduce entropic decay. You can never Seize it entirely but maybe possible to slow it down a lot…
Indeed, everyone has their own personal measure of time.
Biological aging reversal appears to be a goal for rich people and scientists. Hopefully they will share the results with the poor folk of the world…
I want to believe Boomer managed to reach the world line Steins Gate, which has a divergence value of 1.048596%, and got to see his family plus his girlfriend again 
No way home.
Hi Darby, It is nice to see you again. No… I didn’t.
Maybe, just maybe… what if he was originally from Timeline A?
In Timeline B, he might have answered those conversations with Dave completely, traveled to the future, and realized it was a massive mistake. To fix it, he traveled back to our timeline—Timeline C. Here, he purposely cut the conversation short and left early, all while recording the timeline variations and leaving notes behind for other versions of John trying to find their way home.
Of course, I am just wildly speculating.
Still, I really wish he “Dave” hadn’t passed away and could come back. It would be so wonderful to have someone around who truly enjoys bouncing around the unique ideas that an apocalypse scenario offers, and who would throw out brilliant theories of their own. ~QS
QS,
Read that paragraph and tell me that it makes sense. It’s a bunch of disjointed phrases that don’t tie together. I honestly have no clue what you’re trying to say. I’m not picking on you. I’m trying to understand what you’re saying so I can answer. Punctuation is important. Periods help. Ampersands don’t. Including articles helps. Leaving them out makes for confusion. Your shorthand is so short that you’re leaving out the meaning altogether.
I’ll repeat one more time. If you have a real question for me stop trying to be funny. Just ask the question. Write full sentences. Use punctuation. Drop the ampersands. If I see laughing emojis in a post directed to me I’ll just assume you don’t intend for me to take it seriously and ignore it.
And “The Wizard of Oz” is actual footage of another dimension. It’s for real. Bugs Bunny and Dr. Seuss said so.
It’s done Darby.
I have completed the task as requested to ensure clarity.
The previous content has been corrected to remove the text that mistakenly included you.
The wording was utilized directly from your Dave Trott post & meant for Apocalypse.
I appreciate your analysis of my statements always, if you wish still.
~QS
Note: For some reason it did not add the second post “my 2nd post, 1st in reply to yours”, it may have been my fault this time, but it would not be the first time… that I posted a quote & it disappeared. (that has also now been corrected)
When people ask for proof
Claim: “I am a time traveler,”
People: “Oh yeah? Where’s your time machine?”
John: “Here are several photographs, a labeled diagram of the engine, and an illustrated manual identifying its components.”
People: Not good enough.
Photos, diagrams, videos, and even working-looking devices are all forgeable, and none of them distinguishes a real time traveler from a skilled fabricator. Good proof has to be something that couldn’t be produced without access to the future, and that anyone can check independently. The main categories:
1. Verifiable predictions made before the event
The strongest practical evidence. The claimant commits to specific, unambiguous predictions in advance, ideally through a method that timestamps them and prevents later editing (a cryptographic hash published publicly, a notarized sealed envelope, a post on a public ledger). Criteria that matter:
It seems to me that the best proof is a pre-registered, specific, low-probability prediction, or a verifiable piece of future knowledge, tested under conditions the claimant doesn’t control and repeated enough times to rule out luck. Pictures of the machine are the weakest form of evidence on the list.
@Apocalypse So weak forageable evidence isn’t evidence?
You sould like a prosecutor.
Pretty sure evidence by any and every definition is still evidence even when its weak and or forageable
@MrPresident
Forged evidence entails that the claims are false.