is it possible to need to go back in time, because you went back in time?
Debate Rounds (5)
Question: Is it possible to need to go back in time because you went back in time, as stated in Eion Colfers book Artemis Fowl book 6 the time paradox?
(Keep in mind that for the purpose of this debate we are to talk as if time travel is indeed a possibility)
My view: I find it to be very possible.
Please only use the first round for acceptance and statement of your view, and the last round as a rebuttal, no new arguments!
However, time travel backwards is extremely improbable. If something similar were to ever be found, it would be the discovery of "sliding" to Alternate Timelines farther behind than us. However, this is unrelated to the topic at hand.
So, in an attempted refute, the person that became sick would not have become sick in the original timeline. The observed timeline is a result of a person from the original timeline in which no time travel occurred traveling back in time and creating a convoluted mess that hurts my brain to even think about. In the original timeline, the person never became sick, and the time traveler traveled back with different intentions in mind.
I know its confusing, it took my friends hours to finally understand.
Person 1's girlfriend, Person 2, is killed in a car accident.
Person 1 travels back in time, and successfully saves Person 2.
Happy, Person 1 travels back to the future.
Once he returns, Person 1 discovers that in the new timeline, he never traveled back in time, so there are now two copies of himself. Person 1A, from the original timeline, and Person 1B, from the new altered timeline. Person 1A survived the rewriting of the rest of the timeline as he was in the past when the timeline changed.
troyamonga forfeited this round.
I believe I understand the topic just fine. It's just that your argument is stupid. There is no possible reason for time travel to have happened beforehand. If it already has happened, then it is more than likely that we would already be aware of the existence of time travelers. If your argument were true, the time traveler would not have to worry about cause and effect, as what happened before would still occur after he returned to the present. Therefore, either time travel is impossible, or it has yet to occur.
And I have realized that time travel debates are incredibly stupid in that, since time travel still has no hard evidence, it can only be discussed. The debate format does not fit time travel discussion very well.
Also, please refrain from patronizing me about the subject of time travel. I am aware of all the little "paradoxes" and situations that go along with the subject, and have spent many hours pondering them. So I would very much prefer to not be treated like an ignorant buffoon. I do not need to "understand the topic better now." I already understand everything there is to know about the subject, save for the math and formulas themselves.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.