Time travel is real… except they haven’t perfected it yet

Sure this fella had a Smartphone in 1995. It's real, yo.

Seems to have already been perfected if this 1940s photo is to be believed

mad muffin wrote: »

Holy shït! :eek: looks like a Samsung galaxy s3

It’s the s12, actually

Cockadoodledoo wrote: »

That was like playing where’s wally

Took me a while to spot him

He's holding the transportation device.

I must be a time paradox duplicate with all this doom and failure.

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

I need a brief synopsis of that video.

Trump, a con-man, arrives in a small Texas town (around 1890 I presume) to offer protection from the impending meteor "storm" that he says will destroy the whole area, unless people buy his magic "magnetium" metal rings or parasols to ward off the rain of destruction. A Texas ranger passing through town is the only man willing to dispute these claims, but the townspeople refuse to believe him and are willing to pay fifty bucks a shot (a fortune in those days) to obtain the goods. It all ends badly for Trump despite taking in a large quantity of cash, when the ranger confronts him and forces him to appear in front of the townspeople, together with the corrupt local sheriff who was getting a take, and refund the money which at this point is most of the local bank's funds after the townspeople broke in to get at it.

I kid you not, I watched the whole thing and now I need a time machine to go back and tell myself not to bother, I could read this instead.

M.T. Cranium wrote: »

Trump, a con-man, arrives in a small Texas town (around 1890 I presume) to offer protection from the impending meteor "storm" that he says will destroy the whole area, unless people buy his magic "magnetium" metal rings or parasols to ward off the rain of destruction. A Texas ranger passing through town is the only man willing to dispute these claims, but the townspeople refuse to believe him and are willing to pay fifty bucks a shot (a fortune in those days) to obtain the goods. It all ends badly for Trump despite taking in a large quantity of cash, when the ranger confronts him and forces him to appear in front of the townspeople, together with the corrupt local sheriff who was getting a take, and refund the money which at this point is most of the local bank's funds after the townspeople broke in to get at it.

I kid you not, I watched the whole thing and now I need a time machine to go back and tell myself not to bother, I could read this instead.

Throw in Trump relocating the Notre Dame cathedral to Paris Texas and Disney would be all over that as a Hunchback/Gargoyles crossover sequel.

circadian wrote: »

Page 3 of a time travel thread and no mention of John Titor? Where the real conspiracy heads at?

Page 3?

Amateur.

Birneybau wrote: »

That video popped up ages ago. And then someone shared it again on Twitter. And, well, here we are again.

No, you've been traveling round in time in a loop.

seaking wrote: »

photo shop .

It's a legit photo as is this one from 1917

Wheety wrote: »

Domhnall Gleeson siting behind her in shorts and a t-shirt.

Why when were shorts and tshirts invented?;)

Time dilation is a weird concept when you think deeply about it. The closer you get to light speed the slower time passes. At light speed time stops. (But you can never have enough energy to reach light speed.). In effect this means that from the point of view of a light photon, it takes zero time to reach its destination. Think about that.

Fiftyfilthy wrote: »

I saw a programme a couple of years ago regarding that pic. They were able to find all clothes ,sunglasses and camera that the man was wearing in the shops for that time period

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/time-traveling-hipster/

NIMAN wrote: »

Photo's are very easily photoshopped these days.

A general rule of thumb I employ, never believe anything you see on the internet.

Neither of those are photoshopped. The last one I posted appeared in the book 'The Great Cape Scott Story’ – a tale of the Canadian region’s history published in 1974



There is likely an explanation for them as there is likely an explanation of this from a Charlie chaplin movie in 1928..

They prove nothing.

Re: the picture in book, see post #41.

As for the film, you can't see a phone in that womans hand, but its the action of the hand being to the ear that we now associate with a mobile phone that makes you assume she must be carrying one.

You and I both know she isn't on a mobile phone and she isn't a time traveller.

The people who believe this sort of stuff are loons, end of.

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

I don't know a lot about the subject so I'm wondering if:

Time dilation = time travel ?

If not what's the difference between the 2 and what's the relevance of time dilaton?

We're all time travelling 1 second at a time into the future