Origin of 'dream and vision' Accounts FOUND

[Garja]

Eddy, here is something else I think you will find equally valid.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/

[Emily]

Damn, my smite got a +1. For the record, i meant to smite his comment that I accidentally gave a plus one too.

EDIT Arg, the one underneath it. Sorry, im a bit drunkj right now.

[ParkingPlaces]

Damn, my smite got a +1. For the record, i meant to smite his comment that I accidentally gave a plus one too.

Silly Emily. Just go back in time and change it!

I would comment about how inane Eddy and his claims are, but he isn't worth the bandwidth.

[Emily]

Damn, my smite got a +1. For the record, i meant to smite his comment that I accidentally gave a plus one too.

Silly Emily. Just go back in time and change it!

I will, but my Delorean is in the shop because my Flux Capacitor stopped working

[jaimehlers]

I almost have to chuckle.  People invent a time machine, so the first thing they do is go back in time thousands of years to show off to primitive tribes.  Never mind the potential danger that they might, you know, obliterate their existing timeline (and themselves) due to changing the past, since we don't know exactly what would happen if someone did go back and significantly alter the past.

See the problem, Eddy_P?

[Garja]

Not only do they go back in time for no other clear reason than to show off, they do it with a cd rom from the 90s. wtf

[Azdgari]

Never mind the potential danger that they might, you know, obliterate their existing timeline (and themselves) due to changing the past, since we don't know exactly what would happen if someone did go back and significantly alter the past.

This always gets me, re: time travel.  An instance of altering the past has a chance of making it so that you never made the trip in the first place.  But even if it doesn't, it still changes things a little in the future.  Which means that the dice effectively get rolled again, regarding whether the past is critically altered and the time-travel trip never happens - because it's a different future and thus a different trip.  This one might not prevent the trip either, but it too alters the past, so that the dice get rolled yet again...on and on, so that ultimately the trip ends up not happening.  Except of course, that if it never happened, then it wouldn't have created the timeline that prevented it.

Say, Eddy, did Ronald Pegg expound on this issue?

[pianodwarf]

This always gets me, re: time travel.  An instance of altering the past has a chance of making it so that you never made the trip in the first place.  But even if it doesn't, it still changes things a little in the future.  Which means that the dice effectively get rolled again, regarding whether the past is critically altered and the time-travel trip never happens - because it's a different future and thus a different trip.  This one might not prevent the trip either, but it too alters the past, so that the dice get rolled yet again...on and on, so that ultimately the trip ends up not happening.  Except of course, that if it never happened, then it wouldn't have created the timeline that prevented it.

Larry Niven argued something similar in his essay on time travel.  If it's possible to change the past thru time travel, people will do it; someone will kill Hitler in his crib, someone will save the Library at Alexandria, people will manipulate the stock market, etc etc etc.  This will have the effect of constantly changing the timeline over and over again until, finally, thru sheer "trial and error", as it were, we end up with a timeline in which time travel is never invented or discovered.  He therefore concludes that if it is possible to change the past thru time travel, then time machines will never be invented.  Makes sense to me.

[Graybeard]

Larry Niven argued something similar in his essay on time travel.  ...He therefore concludes that if it is possible to change the past thru time travel, then time machines will never be invented.  Makes sense to me.

How do we know we are not living in a present in which the past was altered?

[jaimehlers]

There are only two ways I can see time travel working.  First, going back in time causes a divergence, a branch timeline, so the original one is never affected.  Meaning it would be impossible to change our own pasts.  And second, going back in time immediately wipes the existing future clean and replaces it with what naturally progresses after the changes.  This is pretty much the scenario Niven outlined, except that you don't have trial and error take place - once you've sent something back into the past, the future that sent it is gone, leaving the something as an orphan of a destroyed timeline.

[pianodwarf]

Larry Niven argued something similar in his essay on time travel.  ...He therefore concludes that if it is possible to change the past thru time travel, then time machines will never be invented.  Makes sense to me.

How do we know we are not living in a present in which the past was altered?

Because (if Niven is right, that is) if it is possible to alter the past, the means by which that alteration can be carried out will never be invented.

[Graybeard]

First let me say that, at the moment, I tend towards the theory that travelling back through the dimension of time would actually bring you out in one of an infinite number of universes. I also consider multiverses unlikely, and I simply cannot accept time travel on a human scale, although on a subatomic level, it might be possible.

On with the show:
Perhaps it's me, but I don't see why "the means by which that alteration can be carried out will never be invented."

Niven's proposition seem to indicate that if the past were alterable, then a time machine could not be invented. This seems like a non-sequitur - there is nothing to say that the invention did not take place at sometime in the future, (what a strange use of tenses) and the inventor carried all details with him and returned with them.

[jaimehlers]

The reasoning is that as long as a time machine exists, someone will use it to make changes to the past which will therefore change the present.  Eventually, those changes will cause the time machine to cease to exist.  It isn't that the time machine would never have existed, it's that it would be written out of existence eventually.

I'm not sure I buy it, personally, but that's the reasoning as I understand it.

[Azdgari]

...doesn't that make ours an "altered timeline"?  It's been altered such that nobody tampers with it again.

[Mr. Blackwell]

Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past.

All conjecture is worthless, it's all about the now.

[Nam]

Or, is it not just the disk but the machine? And, if so: where are they plugging it into?

Good question.
Link to answers: http://www.worldbreakingdiscoveries.com.au/ref/faq.html#Q7

I am not clicking your link. Answer the question here. You're making the claim; backit up. Don't provide links as answers.

-Nam

[Eddy_P]

Never mind the potential danger that they might, you know, obliterate their existing timeline (and themselves) due to changing the past, since we don't know exactly what would happen if someone did go back and significantly alter the past.

See the problem, Eddy_P?

You must have missed a previous post where I said

No, they did not go back to start religions.
Ronald Pegg believed that when a time machine was (will be) built, the first field trip was back to the ancient Middle East, somewhere around the Mesopotamian region.

The purpose was simple - using their new toy (time machine) and showing off, the chrononauts gave a 'show and tell' of the future to the very first civilized people they could find.

It has been proposed that historical cd-roms were selected which were relevant to neighbouring regions (from which future civilizations would emerge), but would mean nothing to the ancient locals due to their lack of geographical understanding. In this way, the experiment could be a success without damaging history. If the people could not understand what they were seeing, then the brief appearance of modern technology and the showing of future information would not change history.

[Eddy_P]

...Say, Eddy, did Ronald Pegg expound on this issue?

Yes.
Ronald Pegg’s ‘TIME  LOOP  THEORY’, Booklet #18.

Unfortunately the Publisher does not wish this information to be available at the present time so I am unable to supply a link.

[Emily]

PM me for a link to his documentation on this. (in PDF file format)
{It is very heavy going}

Why PM you for the link if you can just post it here. I'm sure others would like to check it out.

So, post it here, please.

[Eddy_P]

I am not clicking your link. Answer the question here. You're making the claim; backit up. Don't provide links as answers.

YOU are off topic from the origin post.
YOU have introduced questions that are not related to the origin post.
Being generous with my time, I HAVE replied, giving you a link so that YOU can find the answer to your off-topic question.

btw. The original topic was whether 4 specific ancient texts contain descriptions of the contents of a certain modern cd-rom.
To evaluate the presented evidence of Ronald Pegg’s claim, a link was given so that YOU may conduct the evaluation personally.

Okay, someone takes a CD-ROM to the past...what are they playing them on? Or, is it not just the disk but the machine? And, if so: where are they plugging it into?

At least 4 cds have been identified.
Either a 386 or 486 Desktop computer system running Windows 3.x

It is surmized that if the technology was available to make and send a time machine, chrononauts, and a computer back in time, then it would be a relative simple matter to power an older style computer.

It was earlier* explained that Noah's Ark was a computer carry and storage box. The computer fitted into the smaller end, while the 200 x 50 x 30 cm end contains enough space for a series of batteries that would be able to power a computer. (Source: http://www.worldbreakingdiscoveries.com.au/ref/faq.html#Q7 )

* pp128-135, A New Understanding – Egyptian Gods and Atlantis, PPHC, 2006

[Eddy_P]

Why PM you for the link if you can just post it here.

No, I can not ‘just post it here’.
That part of Ronald Pegg’s work has not yet been released by the publisher.
I was personally answering one person’s question.
So, under advice, I have been requested to rescind my posted invitation.

[Nam]

Oh, this is all my fault. You not posting the answer, and providing a link, which makes this "off-topic" (in your warped mind), and my fault.

Wow!

-Nam

[Nam]

Either a 386 or 486? No difinitive knowledge of which one?

You do realize we are all laughing at your inanity, right?

-Nam

[Emily]

No, I can not ‘just post it here’.
That part of Ronald Pegg’s work has not yet been released by the publisher.
I was personally answering one person’s question.
So, under advice, I have been requested to rescind my posted invitation.

SO you are willing to release it via PM? That makes no sense so I am going to just assume you're dodging.

[Emily]

No, I can not ‘just post it here’.
That part of Ronald Pegg’s work has not yet been released by the publisher.
I was personally answering one person’s question.
So, under advice, I have been requested to rescind my posted invitation.

I did you a favor:

http://www.worldbreakingdiscoveries.com.au/ref/rprb.html

Booklet #18 is the last link on the page.

This might be it:

http://www.worldbreakingdiscoveries.com.au/booklets/Q_Ref.pdf

Your welcome.

[Mr. Blackwell]

Eddy,

What you are doing is tantamount to SPAM.

I am tempted to give you some sort of credit for having the balls to even attempt to peddle this shit on an atheist forum but I'm pretty sure you are just stupid.

[Emily]

I am tempted to give you some sort of credit for having the balls to even attempt to peddle this shit on an atheist forum but I'm pretty sure you are just stupid.

He's been on other forums. Like:

http://paranormalis.com/threads/computer-technology-found-documented-in-ancient-texts.2334/page-2

http://timetravelinstitute.com/threads/modern-technology-depicted-in-ancient-picture.5334/

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=160251

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=44014

http://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control=msg&m=115628&mlist=on&mbrid=2394

I will admit that all forums are of various topics. So he's pretty sure about spreading this stuff to whomever will listen.[1]

Eddy, I have a question: Do you also go by the name of Robert Edwin Pengilly? You're real name isn't Eddy Pengelly, is it? You created that web site, didn't you? You last modified it on September 3, 2012, didn't you? What did you last add? If you claim to have been a researcher with Ron Pegg, why did you lie about your name like you did in your intro[2]?

1.	but no one will here.
2.	http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,24000.msg534496.html#msg534496

[Nam]

Well, he's like one of those motivated speakers: he's got a product to sell; and others may buy it but I don't think anyone here is. He came in with too many inconsistencies. Perhaps next time, he'll say, "They took a portable device to play the CD-ROM. So, no need for plugs.". At least that'd make more sense.

He lost everyone, I feel, at CD-ROM. It's so last year, you know?

-Nam

[3sigma]

So he's pretty sure about spreading this stuff to whomever will listen.

Strangely enough, I also haven’t seen it mentioned on the news or in scientific journals that a CD and computer were transported through time despite Eddy banging that drum for years now. It’s almost as though no one is listening. I wonder why.

Tell us, Eddy, when Pegg’s research was “peer reviewed” was it accepted by the scientific community at large or was it roundly rejected? Who was on the peer review panel? Was it just you, perhaps?