Hoax Museum Archives
Hoax Museum Hall of Fame
|
John Titor and the Election of 2004
In late 2000 a man calling himself John Titor began posting messages on internet discussion boards, claiming that he was a time traveler from the year 2036 (his time travel machine was a 1967 Chevrolet). His mission had been to journey back to the year 1975 and make contact with his grandfather, who was a member of the engineering team developing the IBM 5100, but somehow he ended up in 2000 instead. The tale of John Titor is pretty familiar internet lore by now, and I'm surprised that I've only made brief references to him before (though I have posted more about other time travelers). Anyway, to make a long story short, John Titor, during the few months he spent posting messages on the internet (he 'traveled back to the future' in March 2001), made a number of specific predictions about the future. In a nutshell, here they are: 2004: Civil unrest develops around the US Presidential election.
2005: An American civil war begins in earnest: "I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse. The conflict will consume everyone in the US by 2012 and end in 2015 with a very short WWIII."
2015: Russia launches a nuclear strike against the major cities in the United States. A world war proceeds that kills nearly three billion people
2034: First time machine built by GE
2036: Titor travels back in time to acquire the IBM 5100
Mr. Dark, on LiveJournal, does a good job of debunking much of the illogic in Titor's vision of the future. However, he also points out that we have arrived at the first stage of Titor's predictions: the 2004 election that is supposed to cause unrest that eventually flares up into civil war. Mr. Dark notes:
"it's been a week and no civil war has broken out, and only the most fringe elements of the left wing still dispute the outcome of the election, do you think we can officially declare the John Titor tale a hoax? Without this lynchpin, the story falls apart completely. If there is no 'civil unrest' over a 'disputed election in 2004', then there is no civil war. No civil war, no nuclear war. No nuclear war, no need to return to the past for some near-ancient IBM PC to solve some otherwise-unsolvable problem."
The creepy thing, however, is that this election has produced an incredible amount of bitterness and division. Witness all the maps of the New United States that people are sharing via the internet. But are we on the verge of a civil war? I don't think so. So it looks like Mr. Dark is right. John Titor is definitely a hoax (was this ever really in doubt?). Though we'll know with even more certainty at the end of next year when the all-out civil war has never materialized.
Listed in chronological order. Newest comments at the end.
Page 1 of 3 pages 1 2 3 >
I don't think it is actually fair to say that this election, in particular, has caused "an incredible amount of bitterness and division." Opinions differed on the candidates and people are more coarse in their language today than in some periods of history, but both the 1996 re-election of Clinton and the 2000 election of Bush produced more "division" (neither won a majority of the vote), both were polarizing and both resulted in a following period in which the party out of power challenged the legitimacy of the president. And, as you say, nobody but a few wackos (and editorial-page pundits, I'd add) challenges the outcome of this last election. Most of us, whether happy or unhappy with the outcome, recognize that the election is over and the people have spoken, and we're getting on with our lives in the way Americans usually do rather than dwelling on the past as is so common in other, less stable, areas of the world.
I'd reserve "incredible division" to describe an atmosphere of frequent mass protests, counterdemonstrations or -- see election of 1860 -- political dissolution.
Posted by Sam in Delaware on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 12:38 PM
I'd reserve "incredible division" to describe an atmosphere of frequent mass protests, counterdemonstrations or -- see election of 1860 -- political dissolution.
I'm sure it depends on who you hang out with, who forwards you email, etc., but in my experience I can't remember anywhere near this level of anger (and depression) in the Democrat community at the result of an election, even going back to the Reagan years. That's why I'd still say this election has produced an incredible amount of bitterness. There was probably more division in the 60s, but that seemed to cut along a generational divide. Today, as you look at the red vs. blue states the division seems vaguely sectional: urban vs. rural. But yeah, people are getting on with their lives. They're not flooding out into the streets in mass protest.
Posted by Alex in San Diego on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 01:46 PM
Uh, Alex, are you saying that the fact that the guy's election prediction wasn't altogether accurate proves his time travel claim is a hoax? I'm not sure I follow you there.
How about this: I claim that I never traveled back in time. I also made some inaccurate predictions about the 2004 election. Therefore, my claim not to have traveled through time is a hoax and therefore time travel is real.
Posted by Big Gary C in Dallas, Texas on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 02:55 PM
How about this: I claim that I never traveled back in time. I also made some inaccurate predictions about the 2004 election. Therefore, my claim not to have traveled through time is a hoax and therefore time travel is real.
Big Gary, it's my turn not to totally follow you. Yeah, it makes sense to me that if Titor claimed to be from the future and said that certain events were going to happen, but then they never did happen on the dates he specified, that this would cast doubt on his claim to be from the future.
Now as for your proof that time travel is real. Of course it's real. We're all traveling forwards through time, one second at a time (except for certain portions of the population who seem to be moving backwards towards the middle ages).
Posted by Alex in San Diego on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 03:12 PM
Now as for your proof that time travel is real. Of course it's real. We're all traveling forwards through time, one second at a time (except for certain portions of the population who seem to be moving backwards towards the middle ages).
I, too, don't consider this to be division in the country, but rather a bunch of whining that is a direct result of the whole 'victim mentality' that the Democratic Party has bred starting during the Clinton administration.
People need to grow up, get over it, and they will. It's funny that in 2000, everyone made a big deal over the lack of a popular vote majority. Now that Bush has a strong margin of victory in that popular vote, it is suddenly no longer an issue of importance to the Democrats.
I'm not a super huge Bush fan by any means, but I certainly identify more closely with the Reps than with the whining Dems.
Let's move on!
Posted by coit on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 03:41 PM
People need to grow up, get over it, and they will. It's funny that in 2000, everyone made a big deal over the lack of a popular vote majority. Now that Bush has a strong margin of victory in that popular vote, it is suddenly no longer an issue of importance to the Democrats.
I'm not a super huge Bush fan by any means, but I certainly identify more closely with the Reps than with the whining Dems.
Let's move on!
I guess the point I was trying to make was that:
1. Being wrong about one thing doesn't automatically prove you're wrong/lying about something else. Maybe the time-travel guy just has a bad memory for dates. Maybe the civil unrest just hasn't started yet.
2. It seems to me that the fact that jumping back and forth in time (in any other way than traveling forward 60 seconds per minute) completely defies logic should be a better reason to doubt its reality than the credibility or lack of credibility of people who say they've done it.
Posted by Big Gary C in Dallas, Texas on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 03:47 PM
1. Being wrong about one thing doesn't automatically prove you're wrong/lying about something else. Maybe the time-travel guy just has a bad memory for dates. Maybe the civil unrest just hasn't started yet.
2. It seems to me that the fact that jumping back and forth in time (in any other way than traveling forward 60 seconds per minute) completely defies logic should be a better reason to doubt its reality than the credibility or lack of credibility of people who say they've done it.
coit, call me a whiner if you want (just don't call me a name-caller), but almost 51% doesn't look like much of a landslide to me.
Posted by Big Gary C in Dallas, Texas on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 03:49 PM
Gary, who said landslide?
However, since you mention it, he did get 3 million more votes than Kerry, including the fact that Kerry beat Bush by over 2 million votes in NY/CA.
Beyond that, you are making my point by your desire to keep hasing it out, and trying to discredit the fact that he won the popular vote. Presumably, had he won the pop vote in 2000, this wouldn't have been an issue, now that he's won the pop vote, you make it about a lack of a landslide.
As I said, let's move on.
Posted by coit on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 04:00 PM
However, since you mention it, he did get 3 million more votes than Kerry, including the fact that Kerry beat Bush by over 2 million votes in NY/CA.
Beyond that, you are making my point by your desire to keep hasing it out, and trying to discredit the fact that he won the popular vote. Presumably, had he won the pop vote in 2000, this wouldn't have been an issue, now that he's won the pop vote, you make it about a lack of a landslide.
As I said, let's move on.
Thanks for the tip, Big Gary. When I travel back in time, I will be sure to take a history book so that I can keep my dates straight. How embarassing to just forget!
Posted by zsa zsa in Jesusland on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 04:05 PM
coit: "hasing it out"?
Posted by Big Gary C in Dallas, Texas on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 05:37 PM
http://www.spearweasel.com/rpg/twheel/darkfutr.htm
John Titor... oh, this kills me. My timeline for an old GURPS campaign keeps showing up in forums about this stuff, so I figured I'd say hi.
Posted by Andrew Benton in Austin, TX on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 06:51 PM
John Titor... oh, this kills me. My timeline for an old GURPS campaign keeps showing up in forums about this stuff, so I figured I'd say hi.
Yeah, Titor is a nut.
Posted by Alex in San Diego on Fri Nov 12, 2004 at 10:21 PM
Everyone knows you can only travel back in time in a Delorean!
Posted by Maegan in Tampa, FL - USA on Sun Nov 14, 2004 at 07:30 AM
Is the civil war starting on this message board?
Posted by Peter on Sun Nov 14, 2004 at 07:29 PM
If time travel was possible
we'd all have it now!
imagine time travel is invented in 2034 as per above
someone buys one, likes it and goes back in time to patent it for themselves first, in 2033 say.
And so on until the cavemen have them.
I can almost imagine a race to get further back in time first and win the patent.
Posted by Sharruma on Sun Nov 14, 2004 at 11:49 PM
we'd all have it now!
imagine time travel is invented in 2034 as per above
someone buys one, likes it and goes back in time to patent it for themselves first, in 2033 say.
And so on until the cavemen have them.
I can almost imagine a race to get further back in time first and win the patent.
It's it obvious (to me at least) that because John Titor made all sorts of postings on the internet after he traveled back in time he altered the timeline and (perhaps inadvertently) averted the election "civil unrest" around the election and ultimately the civil war. This then led directly to the failure of GE to invent (or at least market) their time machine, and therefor no other time travelers have appeared.
John.
Posted by John. on Mon Nov 15, 2004 at 08:19 AM
John.
Perhaps:
But time travel in of itself isn't exactly an
innovative idea.
H.G. Wells I think published the idea in 1895 and I doubt the idea was new then.
Assuming the technology to build such a machine doesn't exist (originally) until 2034, the fact that GE can build one then means others can do so too.
Sooner or later and given it might be 2000, 3000, 4000 years later another time machine would be invented.
If it's ever possible to build, we would have it now.
The technology might not exist now, but it would (exist now) if time travel could ever go in a backwards direction.
Posted by Sharruma on Mon Nov 15, 2004 at 01:26 PM
But time travel in of itself isn't exactly an
innovative idea.
H.G. Wells I think published the idea in 1895 and I doubt the idea was new then.
Assuming the technology to build such a machine doesn't exist (originally) until 2034, the fact that GE can build one then means others can do so too.
Sooner or later and given it might be 2000, 3000, 4000 years later another time machine would be invented.
If it's ever possible to build, we would have it now.
The technology might not exist now, but it would (exist now) if time travel could ever go in a backwards direction.
Hmm, isn't a little egotistical to think that people who could travel anywhere in the past or future would want to come visit us?
Posted by Big Gary C in Dallas, Texas on Mon Nov 15, 2004 at 05:31 PM
I can't speak about time travel, but I'm surprised that (and curious about) there would be people who aren't aware of/deny the degree of anger concerning Bush's administration, or are not aware of some very legitimate concerns about the (reported) vote tally.
As for the great degree of anger and distrust, I can't speak for any "fringe" groups, but I can speak about the rage and anger that has slowly been building among ordinary, working class people, as our jobs are being downsized, outsourced, etc. We, as a group, are obviously worker harder and longer, and falling further behind. That's not because we're "maxed out" on credit cards, but because we've lost health insurance,have no job security, and wages have steadily falloen behind the cost of basic needs.
Add this to a war that doesn't make sense. Sure, it was a strike against Iraq, which bombed the WTC...except that Iraq didn't do it. Then the war was a hunt for those weapons of mass destruction...which weren't there. OK, but we had to get Saddam. So we got him, but the war rages on. Oh, that's right, we're going after those hotbeds of terrorists: presumably, there are groups of terrorists sitting around somewhere, just waiting to be killed, perhaps being so helpful as to put signs outside their houses announcing "Terrorists live here". Sure.
All of this is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg of the distrust, anger and resentment that has been growing among those hopelessly ordinary in cities, small towns and rural areas.
Don't believe it? Just take some time, come into the factories, stores and restaraunts where these people work, and listen. Listen to the whole cross-section of ages, political affiliations, religious beliefs, and you are going to hear distrust at best, and more often, anger/rage.
Posted by Dianka Fabian in Wisconsin on Tue Nov 16, 2004 at 11:57 PM
As for the great degree of anger and distrust, I can't speak for any "fringe" groups, but I can speak about the rage and anger that has slowly been building among ordinary, working class people, as our jobs are being downsized, outsourced, etc. We, as a group, are obviously worker harder and longer, and falling further behind. That's not because we're "maxed out" on credit cards, but because we've lost health insurance,have no job security, and wages have steadily falloen behind the cost of basic needs.
Add this to a war that doesn't make sense. Sure, it was a strike against Iraq, which bombed the WTC...except that Iraq didn't do it. Then the war was a hunt for those weapons of mass destruction...which weren't there. OK, but we had to get Saddam. So we got him, but the war rages on. Oh, that's right, we're going after those hotbeds of terrorists: presumably, there are groups of terrorists sitting around somewhere, just waiting to be killed, perhaps being so helpful as to put signs outside their houses announcing "Terrorists live here". Sure.
All of this is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg of the distrust, anger and resentment that has been growing among those hopelessly ordinary in cities, small towns and rural areas.
Don't believe it? Just take some time, come into the factories, stores and restaraunts where these people work, and listen. Listen to the whole cross-section of ages, political affiliations, religious beliefs, and you are going to hear distrust at best, and more often, anger/rage.
Gee, that's quite a whine you have there. Once again, you reinforce my point exactly.
Posted by coit on Wed Nov 17, 2004 at 12:06 AM
Page 1 of 3 pages 1 2 3 >