"George W Harris" <gharrus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:lmmpq35rbgr9sqmr9t81degqq7ip91it20@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 15:40:30 -0500, "KalElFan" <kalelfan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
> :"George W Harris" <gharrus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> :news:j27oq3lovt4du0lvdt8olp26p8qb70viq8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> :
> :> ... in T2 the date of John's birth is seen on a computer screen to be
> :> February 28th, 1985.
> :
> :Which would mean he's 14 in February 1999, and still 14 after they
> skipped
> :forward 8 years to present day. I think the changes made to the
timeline
> :allow for them to move his birthdate back to 1982 if they want to,
making
> :him a closer to plausible 17-year-old high school student now. There's
> no
> :fundamental paradox in moving that date back, just as Judgment Day and
> :when and how Skynet happens and so on can be altered. Not so with the
> :constraints I listed and expressed again here...
>
> Yes there is; if you assume you can change the
> past by changing the future, then you'll get a paradox. If
> they successfully prevent Skynet from coming into
> existence, by your reasonaing that would prevent Kyle
> Reese and all the terminators from coming into the past,
> so they'd never be there, so John Connor wouldn't exist
> and Sarah Connor would have no motivation to keep
> Skynet from existing.
>
> If you can change any thing in the past, then
> there's no reason that you can't change *anything* in
> the past.
> :
> :> :The main point is that his existence is part of a time loop, and
some
> of
> :> :the assertions or excuses in other posts don't address that.
> Suggesting
> :> :we just don't think about it, or using semantics that try to avoid
or
> :> :wish away the inherent paradox, will be insufficient for the core
base
> :> :that gets the issue.
> :>
> :> There is no inherent paradox in a closed timelike-curve, or a causal
> loop.
> :> There's only a paradox in an *inconsistent* closed timelike curve; a
> kill-
> :> your-grandfather situation.
> :
> :Yes, but the context of the discussion was exactly that. In order to
> avoid
> :such a paradox,
>
> I guess the context here is 'not understanding what a
> paradox is'.
>
> --
Maybe Arnie got the wrong phone book in the first movie. Maybe the real
John
Connor is in some military school somewhere and this Sarah and John are
just
decoys to keep Skynet busy wheile he goes about his job of saving
humanity.
Maybe, when it's all over, they'll meet and have a good laugh about it
all.
"Hey, Connor! I owe you a beer!"
|
