Breaking News! Time Traveller goes back in Time to attend Chaplin Premiere! - Page 2

Gn2Dlnd · 10-27-2010, 12:20 PM

I made it worse! Nooooo, silly! I was referring to your creative spelling of the word, "puhleeze!" I italicized "this," and I'm overpronouncing the word as I type it, how could you not get that?

Moonliner · 10-27-2010, 12:27 PM

Good! I thought you we being awfully dense. Glad we finally figured it was me not you.

Oh wait....

Moonliner · 10-27-2010, 12:46 PM

This thread does make we wonder, what would it take to convince you a time traveler was captured on film in 1928?

Assuming they were trying to blend in (so no waving "Hillary in 2012" signs) what would you look for?

Digital watch, an LED? The same person 50 or 100 years apart?

Would finding a odd bit of clothing, like a modern looking baseball cap be enough?

Huh. I might have a new hobby. Sneaking into various archives and planting photo-shopped documents for people to find years later....

Alex · 10-27-2010, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonliner

What's the term for taking an argument to an extreme in order to make a point?

Reductio ad absurdum.

JWBear · 10-27-2010, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonliner

I was casting dispersions on the idea of a time traveler being in the Chaplin film by relating it to another example of a supposed time traveler. One that had been thoroughly debunked in the very article I linked it to. Only to have it pointed out to me that it had been debunked.

The "bluetooth" comment was pretty much the same idea. What's the term for taking an argument to an extreme in order to make a point?

I didn't catch that. Sorry. I'm sick; my brain is all muddled.

Moonliner · 10-27-2010, 01:16 PM

While I do not accept the central premise of the individual in question being a time traveler, it was interesting to see that transvestites have been around on Hollywood blvd. since at least the 20's.

Wait a second..... Time Travel, Transvestite, movies, Is that.....

Alex · 10-27-2010, 01:24 PM

Since practical time travel would violate much of what we believe to be true about the fundamental rules of the universe the first question would be how would you convince me that a photo that seems to contain irrefutable evidence of time travel wasn't a fake.

And assuming they're trying to blend in, it would be hard to say what would be proof because anything to obvious as a digital watch you'd have to wonder how they could be so stupid to leave it so visible.

One thing that comes to mind as something more likely to slip notice would be a polio vaccination scar (though that would place the time traveler as from a very specific future time). But that probably wouldn't be clear enough in most photographs to be certain of what it was. In a validated audio recording I imagine the occasional anachronistic form of speech couldn't help but slip in.

Gn2Dlnd · 10-27-2010, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonliner

While I do not accept the central premise of the individual in question being a time traveler, it was interesting to see that transvestites have been around on Hollywood blvd. since at least the 20's.

At least? Puhleeze! (see what I did there?)

Trannys in Hollywood could be a 14 episode Ken Burton documentary series!

flippyshark · 10-28-2010, 03:33 PM

I looks to me like she's holding on to the rim of her glasses to steady them. (Cheap prop glasses are a pretty commonplace bane to actors.)

JWBear · 10-28-2010, 03:45 PM

This is not a scene from the movie. It's from footage of crowds outside the theater at the premier.

10-27-2010, 12:20 PM	#11
Gn2Dlnd Parmmadore Jim Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Casita del Queso Posts: 3,810	I made it worse! Nooooo, silly! I was referring to your creative spelling of the word, "puhleeze!" I italicized "this," and I'm overpronouncing the word as I type it, how could you not get that? __________________ Does anyone still wear a hat?
	Submit to Quotes

10-27-2010, 12:27 PM	#12
Moonliner 8/30/14 - Disneyland -10k or Bust. Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 9,022	Good! I thought you we being awfully dense. Glad we finally figured it was me not you. Oh wait.... __________________ - Taking it one step at a time.
	Submit to Quotes

10-27-2010, 12:46 PM	#13
Moonliner 8/30/14 - Disneyland -10k or Bust. Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 9,022	This thread does make we wonder, what would it take to convince you a time traveler was captured on film in 1928? Assuming they were trying to blend in (so no waving "Hillary in 2012" signs) what would you look for? Digital watch, an LED? The same person 50 or 100 years apart? Would finding a odd bit of clothing, like a modern looking baseball cap be enough? Huh. I might have a new hobby. Sneaking into various archives and planting photo-shopped documents for people to find years later.... __________________ - Taking it one step at a time. Last edited by Moonliner : 10-27-2010 at 12:58 PM.
	Submit to Quotes

10-27-2010, 01:16 PM	#16
Moonliner 8/30/14 - Disneyland -10k or Bust. Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 9,022	While I do not accept the central premise of the individual in question being a time traveler, it was interesting to see that transvestites have been around on Hollywood blvd. since at least the 20's. Wait a second..... Time Travel, Transvestite, movies, Is that..... __________________ - Taking it one step at a time.
	Submit to Quotes

10-27-2010, 01:24 PM	#17
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Since practical time travel would violate much of what we believe to be true about the fundamental rules of the universe the first question would be how would you convince me that a photo that seems to contain irrefutable evidence of time travel wasn't a fake. And assuming they're trying to blend in, it would be hard to say what would be proof because anything to obvious as a digital watch you'd have to wonder how they could be so stupid to leave it so visible. One thing that comes to mind as something more likely to slip notice would be a polio vaccination scar (though that would place the time traveler as from a very specific future time). But that probably wouldn't be clear enough in most photographs to be certain of what it was. In a validated audio recording I imagine the occasional anachronistic form of speech couldn't help but slip in.
	Submit to Quotes

10-28-2010, 03:33 PM	#19
flippyshark Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 2,852	I looks to me like she's holding on to the rim of her glasses to steady them. (Cheap prop glasses are a pretty commonplace bane to actors.)
	Submit to Quotes

10-28-2010, 03:45 PM	#20
JWBear Worn Romantic Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Long Beach California Posts: 8,435	This is not a scene from the movie. It's from footage of crowds outside the theater at the premier. __________________ Unrestrained frivolity will lead to the downfall of modern society.
	Submit to Quotes

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode