Did These Brothers Write the Internet's Biggest Time Travel Hoax...
- Thread starter JudasTitor
- Start date
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
Consider for a moment.
If Titor was real, the description and the results of the many investigations that people have conducted into a man that suddenly disappeared, this is exactly the results you would find.
Pretty much nothing.
If the story was a hoax, the incredible amount of people searching for the answer, and are willing to stretch any fraction of evidence to construct a conclusive resolution out of thin assumptions, you would think there would be more.
For instance, the claim that one of the Haber brothers was a computer scientist at the time, and is now a big-time cyber security tech. One of the earliest of John's posts were saying that he couldn't post pictures. Technically, that wasn't true, he just didn't know how. It wasn't until Pamela offered to help, that those pictures started posting. That sounds like something a computer scientist would be able to handle, or already have it set up if it were such a well-orchestrated hoax like this creator implies.
There was another post that gave me pause when hearing that the same Haber brother was an IBM expert. That sounds good because John claimed a lot of stuff regarding IBM but then calls the internal system of IBM the "registry or something." That is not something an IBM guy would say.
Another great bit of evidence used in favor of Larry being the hoaxer is based on Larry's spotlight hogging, and access to very specific accounts and information. However, that doesn't say Larry was the hoaxer, that only proves that he is likely the family attorney. If the primary client is incommunicado, then who will answer questions to any media? The mother? Nope, the lawyer always handles the media when the client is in jail or dead. In this case neither apply because there was no trial, because there was no crime. So, it isn't exactly easy to compare this situation to normal ones.
Also, the fact about him having Pamela's email and contact info (which I wasn't even aware) doesn't prove that he was the hoaxer because if he was the family attorney, that information would have been entrusted to him as evidence in case someone tries to sue the family for whatever reason. Which also explains one reason why the mom didn't want the spotlight. Among others I am certain. Listen to the narrator practically begging the audience not to bother anyone of the people discussed.
Every time I learn more about this, 25-year-long- "hoax", the more I am convinced to the contrary of the content creator's thesis.
Thank you for the thread. Very interesting video with a lot of new information to me.
- Jay
If Titor was real, the description and the results of the many investigations that people have conducted into a man that suddenly disappeared, this is exactly the results you would find.
Pretty much nothing.
If the story was a hoax, the incredible amount of people searching for the answer, and are willing to stretch any fraction of evidence to construct a conclusive resolution out of thin assumptions, you would think there would be more.
For instance, the claim that one of the Haber brothers was a computer scientist at the time, and is now a big-time cyber security tech. One of the earliest of John's posts were saying that he couldn't post pictures. Technically, that wasn't true, he just didn't know how. It wasn't until Pamela offered to help, that those pictures started posting. That sounds like something a computer scientist would be able to handle, or already have it set up if it were such a well-orchestrated hoax like this creator implies.
There was another post that gave me pause when hearing that the same Haber brother was an IBM expert. That sounds good because John claimed a lot of stuff regarding IBM but then calls the internal system of IBM the "registry or something." That is not something an IBM guy would say.
Another great bit of evidence used in favor of Larry being the hoaxer is based on Larry's spotlight hogging, and access to very specific accounts and information. However, that doesn't say Larry was the hoaxer, that only proves that he is likely the family attorney. If the primary client is incommunicado, then who will answer questions to any media? The mother? Nope, the lawyer always handles the media when the client is in jail or dead. In this case neither apply because there was no trial, because there was no crime. So, it isn't exactly easy to compare this situation to normal ones.
Also, the fact about him having Pamela's email and contact info (which I wasn't even aware) doesn't prove that he was the hoaxer because if he was the family attorney, that information would have been entrusted to him as evidence in case someone tries to sue the family for whatever reason. Which also explains one reason why the mom didn't want the spotlight. Among others I am certain. Listen to the narrator practically begging the audience not to bother anyone of the people discussed.
Every time I learn more about this, 25-year-long- "hoax", the more I am convinced to the contrary of the content creator's thesis.
Thank you for the thread. Very interesting video with a lot of new information to me.
- Jay
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
One more thing that may have been overlooked here. Larry Haber is assumed to be the one that wrote A Time Traveler's Tale for 2 reasons.
1. The credit in the beginning of the book is The Titor Foundation.
2. Introduction is told from the perspective of a lawyer in Nebraska
"In January of 2003, a young couple and their five-year-old son entered my law office in Nebraska."
I thought Larry Haber was from Celebration Fl.
Did he also have a practice in Nebraska?
He would have to pass the BAR there and pay taxes there.
Either way, Larry Haber's name is never mentioned. If he was a spotlight hog, like this video implies, not taking credit in a book is funny way of showing it.
My point is: The lack of evidence seems to be more evidence that John was the real deal.
1. The credit in the beginning of the book is The Titor Foundation.
2. Introduction is told from the perspective of a lawyer in Nebraska
"In January of 2003, a young couple and their five-year-old son entered my law office in Nebraska."
I thought Larry Haber was from Celebration Fl.
Did he also have a practice in Nebraska?
He would have to pass the BAR there and pay taxes there.
Either way, Larry Haber's name is never mentioned. If he was a spotlight hog, like this video implies, not taking credit in a book is funny way of showing it.
My point is: The lack of evidence seems to be more evidence that John was the real deal.
JudasTitor
Quantum Scribe
Im not sure what year Kay moved to Nebraska.
M
-Marlfox
Hmm...the Nebraska part intrigues me. The hillbilly friend I mentioned in one of my earlier posts that was making backyard superconductors was from Nebraska. Hahah and the only name I know him and anyone else knows him by was "Bugman", so I still don't actually know who he really is. This friggen dude had tech decades ahead in the early 00's. Passed a bunch of it along to my dad when he was working for the gov. I learned a whole lot of what I know about engineering, and really the multiverse from him.
Ahhhh! Now I feel like I need to find him!! Bugman had a kid that I used to sort of baby sit / sort of hang out with. He could do things with computers like me, but couldn't explain for sht what he was doing or how it worked. Was John ever described as being maybe a little slow or autistic? I've been consistent that I still don't think "John Titor" exists....but there's some golden nuggets in some of the threads I've reviewed that makes me think they know a little bit of what's up. The more I think about it...the fishy thing to me was the microsingularity engine. Were someone to try building the thing Titor described--they'd only really be making a bomb. No bombs went off on Y2K (that I'm aware of).
The Y2K thing oh man I have stories! My dad used to work for the US Gov doing cybersecurity & Y2K really spooked them at work. I remember them quite literally ripping IBM mainframe hardware off the walls of this place called "The Blue Room", which was basically an underground intelligence center somewhere between DC & NY that monitored all the communications in the NE corridor.
If I were a betting man, I'd bet things are going to get really weird now
Hahaha and the Trump admin is now hosting UFO hearings
www.youtube.com
^ It's not going to be covered ofc, but I told y'all plainly here?!...Archons are the actual problem.
Archons are problematic to fight because they don't exist the same as we do & are weird with time.
They exist to us the same way we exist to fish when we dip our fingers in the pool.
My solution was just to build the paradox wall. Using the pool analogy very loosely, the doxwall is like a lid on the pool that also keeps critters out. As of lately the doxwall / pool lid is rather flimsy.
Ahhhh! Now I feel like I need to find him!! Bugman had a kid that I used to sort of baby sit / sort of hang out with. He could do things with computers like me, but couldn't explain for sht what he was doing or how it worked. Was John ever described as being maybe a little slow or autistic? I've been consistent that I still don't think "John Titor" exists....but there's some golden nuggets in some of the threads I've reviewed that makes me think they know a little bit of what's up. The more I think about it...the fishy thing to me was the microsingularity engine. Were someone to try building the thing Titor described--they'd only really be making a bomb. No bombs went off on Y2K (that I'm aware of).
The Y2K thing oh man I have stories! My dad used to work for the US Gov doing cybersecurity & Y2K really spooked them at work. I remember them quite literally ripping IBM mainframe hardware off the walls of this place called "The Blue Room", which was basically an underground intelligence center somewhere between DC & NY that monitored all the communications in the NE corridor.
If I were a betting man, I'd bet things are going to get really weird now
Hahaha and the Trump admin is now hosting UFO hearings
- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
www.youtube.com
^ It's not going to be covered ofc, but I told y'all plainly here?!...Archons are the actual problem.
Archons are problematic to fight because they don't exist the same as we do & are weird with time.
They exist to us the same way we exist to fish when we dip our fingers in the pool.
My solution was just to build the paradox wall. Using the pool analogy very loosely, the doxwall is like a lid on the pool that also keeps critters out. As of lately the doxwall / pool lid is rather flimsy.
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
I don't understand, what do you mean, doesn't exist? You mean, like a hoax, or that he might be dead by now?
I have been thinking about Y2K too.
Just as a hypothetical thought experiment, I asked ChatGPT to describe Y2K had people not taken it seriously or had blind-sided everyone altogether. It basically described exactly what John described.
However, John posted about that event after nothing happened. To me, that shows he didn't start posting just to play on people's fears.
Here is another fun 'what if...'
If Y2K blind-sided the world, planes would have been grounded for at least a few months, or perhaps that entire year depending on the technical severity, thereby thwarting the 9/11 attacks.
That is why John never hinted at that, because it wouldn't have happened in his past.
What do you think?
Classicalfan626
Staff member
I think 9/11 was an inside job caused by the U.S. government, and they lied about them being terrorist attacks.
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
I can't argue with that. For two major reasons in my opinion.
1. Capacity and Load.
- Tuesday is historically the lightest travel day of the week in commercial aviation.
- You can see a pattern emerge from the plan that conserves life.
- It was just after Labor Day, a period when leisure travel dips and business travel hasn’t fully ramped up.
- The early morning departure times and transcontinental routes meant high fuel loads but fewer passengers.
- The economic downturn in 2001, including the dot-com bust, had already depressed airline revenues.
- Flight 93, an aircraft that can carry 182 passengers went down in that field in PA with 37 passengers and 7 crew a total of 44 souls.
To me, that is a bit light for terrorists that masterminded a plan to maximize casualties, not minimize them.
2. The other reason I can't argue is not the attacks themselves, but what proceeded the attacks.
Following the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. government dramatically increased military spending to over $14 trillion since 2001, and a significant portion of that went to private defense contractors.
According to multiple studies, including Brown University’s Costs of War project, up to half of that total, roughly $7 trillion was awarded to contractors.
There is a fine line between skeptical and naive.
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
For some perspective:
One trillion.
How long would it take to count to a trillion?
approx. 32,000 years.
That is a big number.
One trillion.
How long would it take to count to a trillion?
approx. 32,000 years.
That is a big number.
Darby
Epochal Historian
Jay - Are you on the right track? I don't know. Maybe. My opinion is probably not. If you want to be convincing you have to change the way you go about posting your thoughts. It's one thing to wing it and post something. It's something else to post an idea and back it up with specific references. That's why,starting in high school, your teachers made you use footnotes in term papers. It was to teach how to document ideas with facts.
Also, you're assertion that Titor's statement that he was unable to post pictures was technically untrue is incorrect. That statement referred to this BBS. The uBB software that Raul was using to run the BBS at the time did not allow the upload of graphics. Pamela offered to assist him with the upload on another BBS. This was Pamela's response: "Guess what? You can put pictures on Doc's board... we would like to see it. Here is the URL: http://pub2.ezboard.com/bmagisystems" ("Time Travel Paradoxes" thread, 02 November 2000 05:48). I found Pamela's extremely quick jump in to assist to be strange. But that's a different conversation.
Now, why don't I believe that Larry Haber wrote or had any direct involvement in writing the posts? First, he's a powerful and well known attorney in the major player film industry. Let's face facts. We talk about tin hat woo science here. It's fun, it's entertaining and it can be educational. But it isn't about topics that a serious attorney want to be directly associated with. He's an attorney and he represents his clients. That his client in this case was involved in writing a fictional online story with the goal of spinning off films, graphic novels, T-Shirts, coffee mugs, you name it would not raise any eyebrows. That's Hollywood. He's charging legal fees to the JTF for his services. Are his brothers involved? So far both his brother and Larry himself have said that whoever started the Rick Haber rumor has the wrong name; there is no one in their family who uses the name Rick Haber. That being said, if one is going to say Larry Haber and Family are John Titor the accuser needs evidence, not supposition based on thin coincidences.
Let's put Haber in perspective. Who are you dealing with in the real world? A powerful attorney. His wife is a retired 29 year Disney executive at Disney World. His father in law is a retired USAF general and former Commandant of the Florida Air National Guard. His son is a very successful scientist for NASA. I've known this for the past 20+ years (with the exception of the son being at NASA - he was about 13 years old during Titor's visit to the forum).
So do your own research. Don't rely on what someone else, including me, posts. Verify the facts.
Have you independently, without reliance on someone else's posts, verified the actual name of the brother you're referring to and verified that e is in fact "a big-time security tech"? A technician is the lowest rung in the electronics world. Talented? An expert in some aspect of electronics? Yes. A scientist holding an MS or PhD in the field of physics and/or electrical engineering? No. If you haven't verified these facts you need to get out there, with an open mind, and do so.
Also, you're assertion that Titor's statement that he was unable to post pictures was technically untrue is incorrect. That statement referred to this BBS. The uBB software that Raul was using to run the BBS at the time did not allow the upload of graphics. Pamela offered to assist him with the upload on another BBS. This was Pamela's response: "Guess what? You can put pictures on Doc's board... we would like to see it. Here is the URL: http://pub2.ezboard.com/bmagisystems" ("Time Travel Paradoxes" thread, 02 November 2000 05:48). I found Pamela's extremely quick jump in to assist to be strange. But that's a different conversation.
I don't recall that post and can't find anywhere in the threads where Titor made that statement. What thread, time and date of the post did you find this? It's not only something an IBM guy wouldn't say it isn't something that Titor would likely have said.
Now, why don't I believe that Larry Haber wrote or had any direct involvement in writing the posts? First, he's a powerful and well known attorney in the major player film industry. Let's face facts. We talk about tin hat woo science here. It's fun, it's entertaining and it can be educational. But it isn't about topics that a serious attorney want to be directly associated with. He's an attorney and he represents his clients. That his client in this case was involved in writing a fictional online story with the goal of spinning off films, graphic novels, T-Shirts, coffee mugs, you name it would not raise any eyebrows. That's Hollywood. He's charging legal fees to the JTF for his services. Are his brothers involved? So far both his brother and Larry himself have said that whoever started the Rick Haber rumor has the wrong name; there is no one in their family who uses the name Rick Haber. That being said, if one is going to say Larry Haber and Family are John Titor the accuser needs evidence, not supposition based on thin coincidences.
Let's put Haber in perspective. Who are you dealing with in the real world? A powerful attorney. His wife is a retired 29 year Disney executive at Disney World. His father in law is a retired USAF general and former Commandant of the Florida Air National Guard. His son is a very successful scientist for NASA. I've known this for the past 20+ years (with the exception of the son being at NASA - he was about 13 years old during Titor's visit to the forum).
So do your own research. Don't rely on what someone else, including me, posts. Verify the facts.
Last edited:
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
The information that I am referencing came directly from the information provided in the video from which is the topic of this thread.
However, this video on the thread is not the only resource with similar claims. E.G.
"Mike Lynch said he believes John Teeter is probably John Rick Haber computer expert and brother of Larry Haber." - Hoax Hunter
Q: Earlier you said something was wrong with UNIX on your world line. What’s wrong with it?
John: "Yes, and with yours too. I have to believe there must be a UNIX — out there someplace that can confirm that. I’m not exactly sure w a i technical issue is but I believe some sort of UNIX system registry stop in 2038."
I took this quote directly from "A Time Traveler's Tale"
@Darby You are quite right, I should not have tried to write that from memory. To be fair though, I wrote an article as a thread starter that was more in depth with references on TTI.
This is where I have diverged from sources and traditional "proof/ evidence."
This is the part of this whole saga that gave me pause.
This type of evidence is known in courtrooms as circumstantial evidence: Relies on inference rather than direct observation. For example, if someone was seen fleeing a crime scene, it doesn’t prove guilt directly but logically suggests involvement.
1. There are no t-shirts, coffee mugs, graphic novels, etc. There is nothing to show for John Titor in two and a half decades. Except a small paperback, an LLC, a trademark, a few videos that regurgitate the story ad nauseum, and then TTI. Most the videos I have seen about John can't even get the story straight.
2. (The Nail in the Coffin.)
If John were a hoax, then you would see him popping up from time to time getting the story straight. Understanding the story, and the implications that are actually accurate. Details that are as well-thought-out as the posts themselves. There have been many, ( I mean MANY) imposters, or people claiming that they have debunked Titor, yet they always have the details wrong.
That isn't my opinion. I can objectively back up any claim I make. Razz got a lot wrong. The Why Files got even more wrong. The video in this was the most accurate and enlightening that I have seen yet, but his conclusions and evidence (or lack thereof) is disappointing at best.
P.S. I appreciate you for everything you have contributed to this site. You are steady and principled, and I respect that. However, even the people that were here all those years ago, may not be convinced of John's authenticity because even they have the details mixed up, misinterpreted, or just not correct. I also have realized that I am not exactly a likable person apparently pontificating rather than inviting dialogue.
Personally, my actual intentions are not to sound dogmatic, but to discuss. I couldn't think of anything more relieving than to be proven wrong about this. TBH, my family thinks I am nuts for my fascination with this story, but Idc.
In summary, you are correct about siting my sources. But I welcome anyone that wish to discuss, debate, or pontificate about Titor. Thanks for the input.
- J
Last edited:
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
I apologize if I didn't address everything. Here is some I missed, let me know if I missed anything else.
This detail is a bit obscure, due to not being there at the time of the posts, but from what I could gather, that if this was a well-orchestrated hoax, then the early interaction with Pamela implicates her involvement considering her "(Pamela's) extremely quick jump in to assist to be strange."
Still, that doesn't say he was a computer expert. There is nothing in his posts that do suggest that. However, what I found strange was John didn't have a huge amount of knowledge about anything technical. He seemed to know just enough about physics to half-ass explain his machine, claiming "he was not a physicist" the entire time. He couldn't explain the "Unix" problem in detail, and most people aren't aware of the 2038 problem now. John knowing about it that, but not knowing what the internal system is called, or having details about it... That just doesn't make a bit of sense. There is a logical dilemma there.
One more thing, a lot of people that talk about Titor not being authentic, they say he was playing on people's fears of Y2K. Except, by the time he was posting on TTI, Y2K came and went, nothing happened. Kind of strange timing if that was his intention.
Here is what they don't bring up:
John admitted to being awol. Being in the year 2000 was a deviation from his mission. He made an excuse when he said that being there was secondary protocol. He had no business being here, he was supposed to get the IBM and return back to 2036. But that is not what he did.
Why is that important? When people are creating narratives, they always write in the style of a play or a movie. Setting, Detail, Backstories, a middle, a climax, and resolution. The details of his mission are details of the storyline or "hoax", but his subtext tells a different story he didn't admit to anyone openly.
Only a brilliant writer can pull that off, maybe. Idk if I am explaining that correctly. (A storyline inside a storyline that remains subtext all the way till the end.) Did he think he was writing the finale to the Sparanos?
Only people that are very familiar with the posts would understand the nuance. Also, if there is a person out there, that pulled off a hoax people 25 years later can't explain or pin it on, you would think that something similar would have been produced from it. But nothing is out there like this. I have checked. But don't take my word for it.
Darby
Epochal Historian
And that's why I suggest that you don't rely on second, third or umpteenth hand sources. If you do that you have no way to tell if you're repeating a hoax, a rumor, misinformation or a joke. What I do know if Larry Haber, in the interview on camera, said that he has no brother named John Rick Haber. You need to verify this information for yourself by doing the legwork yourself. It's not easy, I know. But doing a real investigation is never easy. Having spent a few decades doing that I know it's not easy. But it is necessary.
Darby
Epochal Historian
My friend, I believe that I gave you some advice two or three weeks ago about paraphrasing by putting the paraphrase in quotes. What you posted above is not what you previously posted, right? You posted, "[He] calls the internal system of IBM the "registry or something." That's very different in many respects. First the UNIX Y2K38 issue has nothing to do with IBM per se nor did he relate the issue to IBM. UNIX is an operating system (OS) similar to Linux. Second, he didn't say "registry or something". He was very specific but incomplete.
I agree that a software engineer circa 2000 would be familiar with the UNIX date rollover issue because it was part of the Y2K issue in the more general sense of 32-bit systems using 6-digit date formatting. 64-bit systems will have no such problem. So we're back to John Rick Haber, whoever that really is or if he really is. In 1998, when this began, how old was he? Though he might be a computer geek today, over a quarter of a century later, what education and career did he have back then? What he is or does today is completely irrelevant to the Titor Saga. If you verify that he's a real person. If you verify that he is somehow involved in the Titor Saga then find out what he was and did circa 1998-2001. Go to the most primary source you can find. But do be careful about violating his privacy - that can land you in deep doo doo. The same applies to the other Habers, especially the son. His work at NASA requires at least a TS security clearance. If I were you I wouldn't touch that one with a 100' pole unless you like tickling the FBI's dragon tail. Caveat emptor.
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
@Darby
Please read this carefully.
I am going to share with you a conversation I had with ChatGPT while trying to explain my position to respond to your response. I only asked two questions, and I got two answers I was not expecting. For a little context, I understand how agreeable ChatGPT is programmed to be, so the first question is based on a response it gave telling me that what John claimed about the IBM 5100 was not correct. It was never designed to emulate UNIX. That was confusion on my part not knowing that IBM confirmed that it could emulate APL and Basic, but not UNIX.
I thought about it for a minute and then, it came to me. I asked it a hypothetical scenario, and its response was just as unexpected but it confirmed what I suspected. This is that conversation:
I asked it to paraphrase a previous question I asked it. However, this response is just for context (potatoes), the meat is after that.
ChatGPT - Got it — here’s a quick paraphrased summary of the previous response:
"Titor had just enough niche knowledge to sound convincing — like knowing obscure facts about the IBM 5100 and the UNIX 2038 problem — but he lacked the depth and precision a true expert would show. His errors, like claiming the 5100 could emulate UNIX or oversimplifying fixes, reveal that he probably didn’t gain this knowledge through direct experience.
In short, he comes off like someone repeating insider information without fully understanding it — someone who knows the secrets, not the systems. That would be obvious to real experts, just like a master chef could spot someone faking experience despite knowing rare cooking tips."
The IBM 5100 could not emulate UNIX, and IBM has never confirmed that it could.
The IBM 5100 had a hidden capability to emulate IBM mainframe environments:
Titor claimed the IBM 5100 could "translate" or interface with UNIX in some way. That appears to be a conflation:
Here’s why:
Only in an extremely hypothetical case:
No, a programmer in 1975 — even a brilliant one — could not simply “tweak” the 5100 to emulate UNIX. The machine lacked the hardware, architecture, and modifiability to do that.
Titor's claim that this was possible with just “a few tweaks” is almost certainly false. It's one of his more obvious technical overreaches.
- This is where it gets interesting.
This is a definite hypothetical scenario, just amuse me for a moment, if you will. Let's say, that Y2K is overlooked, and everything that could have happened, did. Then, because of world wide panic, chaos, and war, many internal systems are never updated. Then 2038 is right around the corner, someone invents a time machine that you can return to 1975 and pick up the 5100, would that thing actually be usegful. Keep in my mind you have access to a IBM programmer when it was built, because you are related to him, and that is the reason you know about the 2038 problem and the emulation of apl and basic?
Let’s unpack it under your "Y2K-wrecked, war-torn, legacy-dependent 2036" premise:
If you're:
Even if you're not the engineer, you don't need to be — just someone with access to:
In 2036, you might:
In that world? Hugely.
Not because it's powerful, but because it's the last key to a locked system everyone forgot existed.
Your scenario is self-consistent and even eerily plausible in its logic.
And that — amusingly — is exactly how Titor told the story.
* Conversation Ended *
So, firstly, I have to ask. Is ChatGPT accurate in all three responses? Did it get the technical aspects correct?
Next, is what the Chat bot said about the hypothetical correct, technically, or at least hypothetically?
If so, the only conclusion is that John existing as a Hoaxer would not make any sense. The only two plausible reasons for this is that John would have made up this story to thread the narrative eye of the needle, connecting the rest of his claims as one cohesive imaginary worldline, or he wasn't that brilliant, and his modest composure and moderate intellect suggests that he was telling the truth. Which would be much simpler for Joe Schmoe to tell the world for a year straight while being grilled by a growingly skeptical forum every day or so to stay relatively consistent the way he did.
- J
Please read this carefully.
I am going to share with you a conversation I had with ChatGPT while trying to explain my position to respond to your response. I only asked two questions, and I got two answers I was not expecting. For a little context, I understand how agreeable ChatGPT is programmed to be, so the first question is based on a response it gave telling me that what John claimed about the IBM 5100 was not correct. It was never designed to emulate UNIX. That was confusion on my part not knowing that IBM confirmed that it could emulate APL and Basic, but not UNIX.
I thought about it for a minute and then, it came to me. I asked it a hypothetical scenario, and its response was just as unexpected but it confirmed what I suspected. This is that conversation:
I asked it to paraphrase a previous question I asked it. However, this response is just for context (potatoes), the meat is after that.
ChatGPT - Got it — here’s a quick paraphrased summary of the previous response:
"Titor had just enough niche knowledge to sound convincing — like knowing obscure facts about the IBM 5100 and the UNIX 2038 problem — but he lacked the depth and precision a true expert would show. His errors, like claiming the 5100 could emulate UNIX or oversimplifying fixes, reveal that he probably didn’t gain this knowledge through direct experience.
In short, he comes off like someone repeating insider information without fully understanding it — someone who knows the secrets, not the systems. That would be obvious to real experts, just like a master chef could spot someone faking experience despite knowing rare cooking tips."
You said:
What do you mean the 5100 could not emulate UNIX. I thought IBM confirmed that?ChatGPT said:
Great question — and you're right to raise it, because this point is often confused in discussions about the IBM 5100 and John Titor’s claims.
Here's the key distinction:
The IBM 5100 could not emulate UNIX, and IBM has never confirmed that it could.
What IBM confirmed:
The IBM 5100 had a hidden capability to emulate IBM mainframe environments:- It could run APL and BASIC using microcode stored in ROM.
- Specifically, it could emulate systems like System/370 (APL) and System/3 (BASIC).
- This was not publicly documented at the time and was later confirmed by IBM engineers.
What it
- The 5100 did not run UNIX, emulate UNIX system calls, or support UNIX-style environments.
- UNIX is a separate operating system architecture that uses a completely different kernel, file system, and system call structure than IBM mainframes of the 1970s.
- No version of UNIX was ever ported to the 5100, and the machine wasn't designed to support it.
Why the confusion?
Titor claimed the IBM 5100 could "translate" or interface with UNIX in some way. That appears to be a conflation:- He may have confused IBM mainframe code (like APL and BASIC environments) with UNIX, or
- He may have meant that the 5100’s ability to read or work with legacy formats could help in fixing UNIX systems indirectly.
Final answer:
IBM confirmed hidden mainframe emulation, not UNIX compatibility. Titor’s statement about UNIX emulation is technically incorrect — and that’s one of the clearest signs he wasn’t a real UNIX expert.You said:
Could a programmer from the 70s make a tweek to allow that emulation?ChatGPT said:
In theory, no — at least not in the way Titor implied.Here’s why:
1.
- UNIX in the 1970s required a multi-user, multitasking OS environment, typically running on:
- PDP-11 (DEC)
- VAX systems
- Later on, System/370 (but only with major OS-level adaptations)
- The IBM 5100, by contrast:
- Was a single-user machine
- Had no MMU (Memory Management Unit) — essential for process isolation in UNIX
- Used a proprietary microcode layer, designed only to emulate IBM mainframe environments (System/3 and System/370), not UNIX
🛠 2.
Highly unlikely — and here’s why:- The 5100’s microcode was burned into ROM. It wasn’t modifiable by external programmers.
- UNIX requires a kernel, filesystem, and process management — none of which the 5100 supported or could reasonably fake.
- You’d essentially have to rebuild UNIX from scratch to run within the very limited BASIC/APL interpreter context — like trying to run Windows inside a calculator.
- Enough memory (typically 16–64 KB),
- A filesystem compatible with UNIX (it used a tape-based system),
- Or the right instruction set architecture.
Exception?
Only in an extremely hypothetical case:- If a team in 1975 had access to IBM’s internal microcode documentation,
- And was willing to rewrite microcode (an extremely niche skill even today),
- And rebuild UNIX to work as an interpreted language inside the APL/BASIC environment (which breaks UNIX’s whole execution model),
Conclusion:
No, a programmer in 1975 — even a brilliant one — could not simply “tweak” the 5100 to emulate UNIX. The machine lacked the hardware, architecture, and modifiability to do that.Titor's claim that this was possible with just “a few tweaks” is almost certainly false. It's one of his more obvious technical overreaches.
- This is where it gets interesting.
You said:
This is a definite hypothetical scenario, just amuse me for a moment, if you will. Let's say, that Y2K is overlooked, and everything that could have happened, did. Then, because of world wide panic, chaos, and war, many internal systems are never updated. Then 2038 is right around the corner, someone invents a time machine that you can return to 1975 and pick up the 5100, would that thing actually be usegful. Keep in my mind you have access to a IBM programmer when it was built, because you are related to him, and that is the reason you know about the 2038 problem and the emulation of apl and basic?ChatGPT said:
Absolutely — if we play in that sandbox, yes, the IBM 5100 could plausibly be useful in your scenario, and the story begins to hold water in a very interesting, internally consistent way.Let’s unpack it under your "Y2K-wrecked, war-torn, legacy-dependent 2036" premise:
Context: Post-Y2K Collapse + 2038 Threat
- Y2K caused widespread failure in digital infrastructure.
- As a result, global recovery prioritized stability over modernization, so many critical systems remained frozen on old hardware and software.
- Now, 2038 approaches, and these ancient 32-bit systems face catastrophic failure due to the time overflow bug.
- Many of these systems can't be upgraded or patched conventionally — the source code is gone, engineers are dead, and the tools to interact with the software no longer exist.
🖥 Why the IBM 5100 Would Suddenly Matter
The IBM 5100 could:- Emulate legacy IBM mainframe environments (System/370 and System/3), which many core systems were originally written for.
- Run APL and BASIC, which were once used in financial, military, and infrastructure codebases.
- Access and manipulate mainframe binaries without needing the full original hardware, which might be long gone by 2036.
- Recover and debug APL/BASIC-based legacy code running on embedded or simulated mainframe systems,
- And the only tools that could talk to those systems were lost to time,
- The IBM 5100 — small, portable, self-contained — would be a critical recovery tool.
Your Background Adds Plausibility
If you're:- Related to an IBM engineer from the 1970s,
- Aware of the secret emulation capability that was never widely published,
- And you have insider knowledge of the 2038 risk (perhaps from others working on systems still running 32-bit UNIX-based software),
Even if you're not the engineer, you don't need to be — just someone with access to:
- The machine
- The old-world knowledge
- And a mission-critical use case
How It Could Actually Help
In 2036, you might:- Use the 5100 to interpret and port legacy mainframe logic, so it can be understood, emulated, or rewritten.
- Run old code to reverse-engineer data formats or system behavior where no documentation exists.
- Interface with preserved media (tapes, disks) using emulated environments that the 5100 still supports.
- Build compatibility bridges between 1970s systems and whatever hacked-together platforms survive in 2036.
So... would it be useful?
In that world? Hugely.Not because it's powerful, but because it's the last key to a locked system everyone forgot existed.
Your scenario is self-consistent and even eerily plausible in its logic.
And that — amusingly — is exactly how Titor told the story.
* Conversation Ended *
So, firstly, I have to ask. Is ChatGPT accurate in all three responses? Did it get the technical aspects correct?
Next, is what the Chat bot said about the hypothetical correct, technically, or at least hypothetically?
If so, the only conclusion is that John existing as a Hoaxer would not make any sense. The only two plausible reasons for this is that John would have made up this story to thread the narrative eye of the needle, connecting the rest of his claims as one cohesive imaginary worldline, or he wasn't that brilliant, and his modest composure and moderate intellect suggests that he was telling the truth. Which would be much simpler for Joe Schmoe to tell the world for a year straight while being grilled by a growingly skeptical forum every day or so to stay relatively consistent the way he did.
- J
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
I think that in order to really understand what John was saying, you would have to suspend reality and believe the story.
For instance, there is not a single video that talks about John Titor who has mentioned that there is a person out there, that is about 27 years old, that would resemble John, because that is his past self. Did his mother tell him who he is, if so, it would be almost certain he is an active member of this forum and has kept it quiet.
I know I would be.
For instance, there is not a single video that talks about John Titor who has mentioned that there is a person out there, that is about 27 years old, that would resemble John, because that is his past self. Did his mother tell him who he is, if so, it would be almost certain he is an active member of this forum and has kept it quiet.
I know I would be.
PaulaJedi
Rift Surfer
I never thought of that. Younger John would exist and he could be here. Now that's interesting. He'd have to be really stealth, or maybe not even post at all.
Jay Walker
Temporal Navigator
Every couple of months there seems to be a new John Titor at this site. Claiming this that or the other thing. Yet, they always forget about the younger John. It would be far more convincing if they actually understood the story. Not one of them do.