If you had a time machine....

But if quantum theorists are right then there's an infinite number of parallel realities (an infinite number where you exist, an infinite number where you've never been born, and infinite number where you have rockets for feet, an infinite number where everything is just shifted two feet to the left) so whatever we do has no consequence. In light of this, I want to go back in time and kill off the dinosaurs.
 
But we're not part of those realities. If you want to look at the big picture, we might as well destroy every living organism known to man. We're just a small insignificant piece of rock floating in an infinite universe.

Also, you have to remember that WW2 led to the formation of the UN. It was terrible yes, but it was a lesson from history that could prove valuable later on through the course of humanity.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, but who's to say that you wouldn't cross into a different reality if you travel through time?
 
Where would you go? What would you want to see? etc...
... about 2.1 Million years into the past and the Location would be on some mountain in todays south Dakota, looking west (on a comfi chair, with beer and popcorn)...

(now you?ll figure out "what" ...)
 
Last edited:
I think i'd go to about 12.000 years BC to see who actualy built the Pyramids and wtf was going on back then.
 

Europe was not a peaceful place before the world wars. Now we have had over 60 years of relative peace, something rare if one looks at the history of Europe.
 
"Go back and kill Hitler"....some of you guys really are idealistic morons, if I'm honest. So far Cobol74 and jetsetter have shown some logic with the topic and gotten it right. Killing Hitler....do you have any idea what that would do to the world ? No, and neither do I. I will go a step further and blame anyone who wants to go back and change history a complete clot , especially when they want to "prevent bad things from happening". It's exactly like jetsetter said; people die, that's the course of life. Shit happens - live with it.

If you must, continue this debate in the politics section, even if it makes no sense whatsoever.

Let's get this thread back on track and see what you would actually want to do and see.

I would have to go back to 1960's, buy a Shelby GT500 and drive across Route 66 (my life long dream), see Elvis Presley live, Woodstock in '69 and some other really memorable shit. Forget about getting the winning numbers in lottery and some other foolishness. I mean yeah, sure....millions of dollars would be nice, but I put great life experiences light years ahead of earthly possessions and wealth.

I would have to see Frank Sinatra, then in the 1970's AC/DC when Bon Scott was still with us, Deep Purple and Led Zeppelin. I'd visit some Grand Prix races when you could still call it racing. Going further back I would for sure visit ancient Egypt to see how the hell were the pyramids actually built. In Rome I'd go see a gladiator fight at the Colosseum and in the middle ages I'd want to see some real knights.

What else...well, I'll try to come up with something else. But really guys....if you DID have a time machine, would you really try to save the world and be some goody good samaritan by killing off Hitler, only resulting in what could possibly be even a worse future than what we have now ? Or would you rather see and do stuff you could only do 40, 50, 60 or more years back.

Sheez...some people just don't have any imagination.
 
Last edited:
See what happened at Roswell, meet the dinosaurs, buy a 250 GTO in cash.

... and controversially, kill Bush Jr... would we have had 9/11?
 
But really guys....if you DID have a time machine, would you really try to save the world and be some goody good samaritan by killing off Hitler, only resulting in what could possibly be even a worse future than what we have now ?

"Hitler: The best thing that could have ever happened to the world!"

Look, this is a great discussion and all, and I'm sure both sides mean well, but you guys look ridiculous.
 
"Hitler: The best thing that could have ever happened to the world!"

Look, this is a great discussion and all, and I'm sure both sides mean well, but you guys look ridiculous.

Well it depends, if there were no Hitler and no WWII in 1939, i'd say by about 1945-47 a decent part of Europe would be taken over by USSR, i.e. Stalin was planning to recover all pre-soviet Russian Empire territories, so would you prefer German Nazis or their Russian alternative?

If you'd really wanna have fun, one could go to about 1939-1940 and convince Germans to pull all the resources, especially graphite, out of the Fau 1/2 and invest all of it into nuclear programme.
 
Last edited:
Oh, NOW, you are going to start some shit.

No, I'm done here. Its one of those arguments where neither side will ever be convinced to change their mind, thus rendering the entire debate completely pointless.

Go on now, keep thinking that Bush planned 9/11, Hitler wasn't such a bad guy afterall, etc. Run along now kiddies!
 
umm....wouldn't it be better to just go kill Gavrilo Princip? Who was the proximate cause of WWI which led to Germany being fucked over by the treaty of versaille which then made germany a shithole of a country that was so desperate as to succumb to people like Hitler?

edit: speaking of which, this raises an interesting moral question....I assume most people would go and kill Hitler/[insert bad guy name here]/etc. BEFORE they started murdering miliions. So suppose you go and actually kill Hitler before he gains any power....have you not become a murderer yourself? Because at that point in time, Hitler has done nothing wrong....he hasn't murdered anyone or did anything and the only "crime" he probably had was his thoughts of such things.
 
Last edited:
Same principle, someone from the Black Hand movement would take his place. Can we give up the changing history argument already? The fact is, no-one can predict the consequences.
 
No, I'm done here. Its one of those arguments where neither side will ever be convinced to change their mind, thus rendering the entire debate completely pointless.

Go on now, keep thinking that Bush planned 9/11, Hitler wasn't such a bad guy afterall, etc. Run along now kiddies!

You just don't get it do you ? No one here is saying either of those things. The point is that nobody can ever know what would and could have happened if Hitler, Stalin, G.W. or any historical figure for that matter, would not have been around.

"Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" - the same principle can be used here; where one could have killed Hitler, the history as we know it wouldn't have existed for the last 60 years. Of course everything might be all sunshine and rainbows but it may just as well not be. It is impossible to know. And therefore it is pretty much useless to say killing off Hitler would have made a better world in the long run.
 
No, I'm done here. Its one of those arguments where neither side will ever be convinced to change their mind, thus rendering the entire debate completely pointless.

I think a healthy debate can be the result even if no one switches sides. The worst thing people can do is ignorance...which basically is: well I'm gonna stick to my story and you to yours so who cares let's just not waste time and not talk about it at all. I think it's better to have a healthy discussion of differing view points.

LeVeL said:
Go on now, keep thinking that Bush planned 9/11, Hitler wasn't such a bad guy afterall, etc. Run along now kiddies!

The Bush 9/11 comment is one post, which is most likely made in a trollish/joking/silly/etc. manner and deserves no response at all.

And I'm not sure if anyone in this thread is suggesting that "Hitler wasn't such a bad guy afterall."
 
I am pretty sure time travel is impossible, bending it could be possible.
 
Top