(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); If time travel were to exist, then that means it does exist.

People are time traveling now as we speak but there must be some sort of limited interactions with us.

I'm assuming the following:

- Rules enstated that one cannot interact with others with people of the past.

- Items of the future are unable to withstand the forces of time travelling which can explain as to why we have no true futuristic weapons. If this is so, time travelling is a one way street [machine would be destroyed in process] or perhaps an identification portal that allows certain DNA to pass through.]

- Items of the future are limited in this time line and are perhaps able to flash memories until a certain time as if no experience/interactions with the person has existed. Perhaps dreams become the exploit of this memory flash and only pieces in certain but not all information with us. This could explain "inspirations" or "epiphanies" that people claim to have. It may be tied with the fallacies of memory flashing.

- If time travelling is true, we can say that as our time line expands and the more dangerous our world is becoming, the closer we are to our time line correlated to time travelling. Why? Those who abuse this power are more than likely to travel back in time to give themselves or an ancestor some sort of beneficial power. We can say as we advance in time, the gap between our current lineage and our future time travelling lineage are closing in, to the point where eventually - as the gap closes, more abuses would occur and the more dangerous our future would become.

Spectulate.

Time Traveling would be amazing, I would most definitely go back to 'Western Times', I'd love to be a Cowboy, riding a horse around all day, RDR :love:

Delete post

Perhaps this could be some future operation.

In order to keep the future as it remains, we must do as what history said what happened.

I doubt Osama was in the future regardless, if we was - Killing him would perhaps mess up the future time line if he lived in the future.

What do you mean, 'Bin Laden's dead' ?, Do you mean Death?

The 'apostrophe-s' can either pertain to ownership or represent "is."

Bin Laden's Dead = Bin Laden IS dead OR Bin Laden's dead.

Usually you'd just go with the first in this situation.

idk man u would get robbed on the quick status on the old west

I posted that in the wrong thread my bad

Haha, thought you did, I could tell by the way you posted it, intending it to be sarcastic? :carling:

Totally off topic. <___<

Anyone else has spectulations?