Forum Replies Created
-
WARNING: SPOILERS. REALLY REALLY BIG ONES TOO.
Blue out the post with your cursor to read this.
<span class=”d4pbbc-font-color” style=”color: white”>But. If you defeat 2014 Thanos in 2023, doesn’t that mean that none of the Thanos stuff from 2014 on ever happened? </span>
I’ve been thinking about this too. I didn’t like this movie’s ideas on time travel. As Antman noted, they defied the laws of time travel as established by every episode of Star Trek. I could be missing something, (I had to urinate 45 minutes into the movie but refused to go so I may have missed some details as I concentrated on not wetting myself) but here’s how I gathered it worked.
The overarching premise as stated by Hulk/Banner is:
The future can’t effect the past.
If you travel back in time the past becomes your future. Since the future can’t effect the past, you need not worry about altering the timeline.
Now how does that apply to Thanos traveling from 2014 to 2023?
In this case when Thanos travels to 2023 from 2014, he is still traveling into the future. Since the future cannot alter the past, the timeline prior to 2023 is unchanged.
I know it’s weird and I’m not endorsing it, but that’s why I think Thanos traveling to 2023 didn’t alter the timeline after 2014.
Well, there was an 8ft long centipede/millipede relative that lived 300 million years ago named Arthropleura…
Not sure what you have against insects.
I know some are icky but insects are people too. Show them more respect.
I have nothing against them; I’m just tired of enabling them.
It’s about time they learned to stand on their own six feet.
Actually, that study that article is based on has come under some criticism.
First of all, it was a review of only 73 studies. That’s not a lot when looking at ‘global’ insect populations. Secondly, most of the studies they looked at came from Europe and the US. Here again, it doesn’t tell us much about global populations.
The biggest problem is that the research focused only on exploring the already declining insect populations. It did not include the studies showing stable and growing populations. So, if you were studying the survival of the human species but limited your data to people with end stage kidney disease, it would lead you to the conclusion that humanity would be extinct in the next 5 years.
Here’s more…
Basically the New Yorker article about the Tanis site has caused quite a controversy in scientific circles.
Apparently it was a no-no for the lead author of the study to collaborate with the New Yorker on an article on research that wasn’t published yet, or at least, not available to the scientific community. The paper is now available and was read by Dr Steve Brusette, who tweeted about it above. Apparently, the lead investigator (DePalma) has a reputation of making a discovery and then running to the press. I know he took some flack in the past for jumping the gun causing him to mistake turtle bones for Dakotaraptor, (a big velociraptor-like dinosaur).
Nobody questions that the site isn’t incredible, but the actual research paper doesn’t mention a lot of stuff in the article. The site is supposedly a dinosaur ‘graveyard’, but only one partial dinosaur bone is mentioned in the paper even though the New Yorker article says that feathers, eggs with embryos, and representatives of every dinosaur from the Hell Creek formation were found at the site. None of this is mentioned in the study. In fact, according to Brussette, the actual study wasn’t about dinosaurs at all.
So, he and a lot of others are asking, “what gives?”
