Find other sites about
-
John Titor is the name used on several bulletin boards during 2000 and 2001 of a poster claiming to be a time traveler from the year 2036.
Reviewed by invisableman Mar 16 2008, 07:00pm ( 30 reviews ) • wikipedia.org
-
DoubleFeel
DoubleFeel
3,843 Favs
-
newdocument
newdocu...
1,187 Favs
-
lorenzius
lorenzius
5,524 Favs
-
cyunem
cyunem
7,623 Favs
Recently online -
relfy
relfy
1,980 Favs
-
bradmcloughlin
bradmcl...
211 Favs
-
charnet3d
charnet3d
266 Favs
-
arte0071
arte0071
1,280 Favs
-
Eduardop
Eduardop
566 Favs
-
liquorsauce
liquors...
589 Favs
- Showing 22 of 30

- Reviews of the site
-
Join StumbleUpon or login to add a review!
-
Rated by Chemoot on Nov 06, 5:51pm
I forgot about this guy
-
Reviewed by thestripedone on Oct 23, 12:54pm
Silly Wikipedia.
-
Rated by John-Forseti on Oct 20, 7:32am
What? This is a load of cobblers, why is it still getting positive attention? None of the predictions so far have turned out anywhere near remotely true, not even interpretively. Write it up into a short story then it might be worth something.
-
Reviewed by JO33 on Sep 22, 2:19pm
Pretty impressive for the young and ignorant.
-
Rated by krasram on Sep 01, 6:57pm
Absolutely fascinating and worth an equal vote of crackpottery.
-
Rated by wobinidan on Feb 25 2009, 5:05pm
He was right, he just came back to the wrong universe.
-
Rated by trill42 on Jan 04 2009, 8:05pm
Wow.
-
Reviewed by SMA11784 on Jan 02 2009, 2:00pm
What's interesting about it is that if he was telling the truth, he could very well have altered the future simply by talking about it. All the fuel for a civil war was there in 2004, it just kind of went away. If you have a mind for conspiracy theories, it's easy to imagine world governments getting wind of these statements and looking at their own plans and saying, "Oh shit, this isn't going to work, we need to regroup." It's easy to just dismiss it, but it's way more fun to hypothesize.
-
Rated by harborcaptain on Jan 02 2009, 11:55am
This is one of those articles that I have mixed feelings about. On one hand, its so unintentionally funny that its almost worth thumbing up. On the other hand, its utterly ridiculous and I certainly wouldn't want to endorse it as anything resembling the truth. In the end, I have to stay consistent and go with a thumbs down for excessive crackpottery.