"The future ain't what it used to be."




The really interesting thing about all of this hypothesising is that no matter how coherent a theory may seem to a given person, there always seems to be somebody else who can view the problem from a different angle and find holes in said theory.

Example..I have read a few messages stating CATEGORICALLY that time travel is not possible, because if it were, we would have evidence of travellers from our future, and since we haven't...

Firstly notice that I said CATEGORICALLY. I've mentioned this before, but is it not a little foolish to make such solid statements about a field that is totally conjectural? Do some people not understand the concept of theoretical science?

That aside, it is extremely easy to shoot gaping holes in the statement without having to use quantum mechanics theories at all..just common sense..


1. The human race, for whatever reason, may never discover how to do it. For example, it may be alarmist, but the possibility of getting wiped out by an asteroid is actually real. This together with the overwhelming possibily of intelligent life having developed somewhere else in the universe at some time or other, but never having visited Earth, in my opinion forms a significant hole in the hypothesis.

However, if that isn't enough, then consider this..

2. Suppose that members of the human race do discover how to send matter back in time at some point in the future. Where is the evidence you may wonder?

Picture this..
A time traveller arrives from the future. What would be the first thing that they would do?

"Hello there, I'm a time traveller from the future. I'm aware that you are quite technologically primitive compared to me and do not understand the complexities of temporal mechanics, but I assure you that I'm not here to meddle with history, or harm you in any way.
What do you mean, Am I mad?"

Let's face it, even if a time traveller did decide to announce his/her presence to a comparatively primitive society, they would probarbly be ignored. Even if they weren't, what would they have to look forward to?
Being burned at the stake?
If it were today, they could get committed to a mental institute, or if believed, subjected to the most unpleasant experiments that our laboratories have to offer.

Forget cause and effect, what about simply knowing what's good for you?

It's quite unlikely that they would be accidently discovered too.
A level of scientific progress that has made time travel possible, would surely be able to make it reasonably covert?? Even if it involved something quite noticable, it's quite possible that they could do it somewhere that is beyond our ability to detect it? I don't know about that, but you get the point.

I believe that time travellers from our future would not only have nothing to gain from revealing themselves, they would positively go out of their way to prevent it. This isn't some conspiracy theory, it would simply come with the territory, they would only be people after all.

Does all of that cast enough doubt? It neither proves nor disproves anything, but that's the point..
What do you think about the possibility that time travellers actually disguise themselves as aliens?

Time travellers disguised as 'greys'?

Well..since I personally don't know what is behind that particular phenomena,I can't claim that it's impossible. It's obviously a notion that a lot of people would scoff at, but they don't know one way or the other either do they?

That's what I was talking about. Time travel, alien visitors, it's all open to pretty wild debate, some more probarble sounding than others. Everyone has opinions, but us 'civillians' can't prove them.

Where I get cynical though (with alien abduction etc), is where people's perceptions are involved. I'm sure that there are witnesses who are genuinely reporting what they have experienced (not hoaxters), but there seems to be a strong chance that they may be misinterpreting the experience. I'm not discounting the whole thing, but I think that blindly believing something is potentially as misguided as blindly disbelieving it.

There are lots of clouding factors involved and that's where the problem lies.

Semi conscious catatonic sleep states that we don't really understand, the inherent unreliability of hypnotic regression (it appears to mix real and imagined memories), the effect on the subconscious of the media hype surrounding the whole thing are just a few factors. Even for someone claiming to have undergone such an experience, it must be very difficult to know what to believe in the light of the above. Not to mention those of us on the outside..

Don't get me wrong, I do believe that it is inconceivable that we are alone in the universe, but I'm not forming strong opinions of the form that extra terrestrial civillisations may take, based on the availlable 'evidence'..

That goes for UFOs too. I've seen the photos etc and there might be highly placed people who know what they really are, but alas I am not among them..On the other hand, said highly placed people may only think that they know what they are..

I'll stay open minded for now..

About the same as the possibility that Aliens disguise themselves as time travellers.


What Time Travellers?
What Aliens?

In this case, I'm afraid I actually WAS being sarcastic, as opposed to the question for Franck M. above where I wasn't. (Hopefully it came across as the HUMOROUS sarcasm that was intended. As I've said below, I'm still working on my semantics.)

It appeared to me that Stephen did not quite get the open minded point of your dissertation, or the real truth of which you speak.

Perhaps I was wrong about him or HIS point on this but it would beg the question: "Why would ANYBODY do that"?

Perhaps I should have just asked that.
We are currently logging these posts and I couldn't help but make comment on this one. It's contents certainly go a long way towards explaining SimonB's rather "mixed" response to our (my) posts.

Jon Formet et al