The Real John Titor - Hoaxhunter

John Hughston AKA Razimus of Hoaxhunter has been working on finding identity of John Titor
since 2004... 9 years have gone by...

John Hughston AKA Razimus is 100% confident, what you are about to see, hear and read are verifiable proof, of the identity of John Titor.

This video is accompanied by 5 documents, which will be freely available & downloadable to all, via Google Drive. The 5 documents are as follows;

JT_MH.xls
JT_TEXT.txt
MH_TEXT.txt
MH_BLOG.txt
JT_RAZIMUS.docx

Link

If the link above is broken it can be seen in the description of the video.

This URL is a public Google Drive folder, you must be logged into a google account to access this folder. Google Drive was chosen to host these files freely because of its stability.

These 5 documents are the study, known as the JOHN TITOR TEXT ANALYSIS COMPARATIVE LINGUISTIC STUDY by John Hughston AKA Razimus of Hoaxhunter.

This text analysis comparative linguistic study conducted by John Hughston AKA Razimus began in September of 2011 and ended in April of 2013.

reply to post by Razimus


The question that arises is what is the motivation of Morey Haber and how did he know the loss of civil rights in the US all the way in 2001?

Btw I applaud the hard work you have been doing

reply to post by Razimus


That's all fine, but would it be too much of a spoiler to tell us who it was and who they were? Some of us--myself for one--are not inclined to go running around signing up with Google (the Great Satan) to get a clue--particularly having terminated all past associations with them for grievous violations of privacy....

Interesting concept... using writing styles to flush out an anonymous poster (such as JT). So I decided to do a little experiment, with the phrase you quoted as being "uncommon" but matching the writing styles of both writers.

So a quick search later on google for the exact phrase "can have a drastic impact on", your 6 word match as a linguistic fingerprint, results in 639000 results for that exact phrase. So this uncommon phrase as you put it, is not actually that uncommon.

I do understand there are other similar matches in your study. However most (not all mind you) are pretty common phrases that even I use in emails. "I look forward to" being one of these.

100% proof? Sorry missed the mark for me personally.

ETA: Just wanted to thank you for the video. I do find it very interesting, and do appreciate all the work you put into this..

Ex

Originally posted by ExhibitEx
Interesting concept... using writing styles to flush out an anonymous poster (such as JT). So I decided to do a little experiment, with the phrase you quoted as being "uncommon" but matching the writing styles of both writers.

So a quick search later on google for the exact phrase "can have a drastic impact on", your 6 word match as a linguistic fingerprint, results in 639000 results for that exact phrase. So this uncommon phrase as you put it, is not actually that uncommon.

I do understand there are other similar matches in your study. However most (not all mind you) are pretty common phrases that even I use in emails. "I look forward to" being one of these.

100% proof? Sorry missed the mark for me personally.

ETA: Just wanted to thank you for the video. I do find it very interesting, and do appreciate all the work you put into this..

Ex

edit on 21-4-2013 by ExhibitEx because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-4-2013 by ExhibitEx because: (no reason given)

The truth has come to light. Out of the people who use the 6 word phrases "can have a drastic impact on" and "is based on the number of", how many of them also use these words:

streamlined
autonomous
syntax
vectors
hawking
thwart
baseline
snapshot
exponentially
inherent
infrastructure
periodically
CAD
UNIX

I can tell you didn't watch the entire 40 minute video.

How many of them use the word "inherent" in the context of discussing computers?

How many of them use the word "infrastructure" in the context of discussing computers?

How many of them use the word "streamlined" in the context of discussing government?

How many of them use the word "measurements" in the context of discussing gravity?

The list goes on and on. How many people do you know use the word "vectors" & "snapshot"?

The list goes on and on.

How irritating.
I hate when people put up a video, and don't explain what happens in it.
I cannot watch Youtube videos. I have always been fascinated by that whole John Titor thing, and would love to find out who it was. I guess you're not inclined to share?

I thought you were John Titor, Razimus?

I recall that many years ago you claimed that you and Titor were one in the same.

Originally posted by Razimus
How many of them use the word "inherent" in the context of discussing computers?

How many of them use the word "infrastructure" in the context of discussing computers?

How many of them use the word "streamlined" in the context of discussing government?

How many of them use the word "measurements" in the context of discussing gravity?

The list goes on and on. How many people do you know use the word "vectors" & "snapshot"?

The list goes on and on.

All of these words seem immensely common in the contexts you're suggesting, and the terms snapshot and vectors are very common in certain fields. Infrastructure is also commonly used for computers.

Congratulations on doing the research, but snapshot is a very common word in computers, data forensics, and various other fields as are many of the other words you're pointing to.

You're comparing two people using technical terms to each other from what I can see?

My advice for those who are skeptical, watch the video, you won't get the bulk of the information in a single example.

I've made the case for the truth, I've spoken the truth, in the end you will see and know I was correct in this instance.

There are other ways it could be 'proven', but I don't feel I need to do so. A linguistic expert could confirm it, a mathematician could confirm the chances of it, this is something I leave for someone else. The case is closed on my end. My next videos will involve other cases I have been researching for years.

The die-hard titorites will never believe the truth even if the actual author personally confessed to them.

Watch the video, judge for yourself, but I wouldn't recommend assuming you know the case, until you've watched the 40 minute video, and download the documents, if you don't have a youtube/gmail account I suppose you can't download the documents, I chose Google Drive because it's a logical place to host the public files.

Originally posted by Bluesma
How irritating.
I hate when people put up a video, and don't explain what happens in it.
I cannot watch Youtube videos. I have always been fascinated by that whole John Titor thing, and would love to find out who it was. I guess you're not inclined to share?

I've spent months preparing documents, I don't think copying and pasting is the way to go. Check out the documents for yourself, it's freely available and downloadable on the google drive URL.

I've spent the past week making a video, I don't think transcribing the video and pasting it here is the way to go.

I guess the JT story isn't too popular these days heh. Well, the subject to my next video will likely be equally as unpopular. I can tell it's unpopular if no one here is willing to login to their youtube account to check out some documents, or even click a youtube video and have it playing in the background, you can listen to it, you don't even need to watch.

Originally posted by Razimus

Originally posted by Bluesma
How irritating.
I hate when people put up a video, and don't explain what happens in it.
I cannot watch Youtube videos. I have always been fascinated by that whole John Titor thing, and would love to find out who it was. I guess you're not inclined to share?

I've spent months preparing documents, I don't think copying and pasting is the way to go. Check out the documents for yourself, it's freely available and downloadable on the google drive URL.

I've spent the past week making a video, I don't think transcribing the video and pasting it here is the way to go.

I guess the JT story isn't too popular these days heh. Well, the subject to my next video will likely be equally as unpopular. I can tell it's unpopular if no one here is willing to login to their youtube account to check out some documents, or even click a youtube video and have it playing in the background, you can listen to it, you don't even need to watch.

edit on 22-4-2013 by Razimus because: (no reason given)

I don't know how much more clear I can be- I cannot watch (or listen to) youtube videos.

I get a message saying "an error has occured, try again later".
With the help of youtube, we are attempting to find out why, but it has been weeks and we still can't find it.

I just asked for a NAME. Not the description of how you got to it.
But never mind. If you can't even make sense of the statement "I cannot see youtube videos" then I doubt your sleuthing skills already and find your dodginess here suspicious.

Originally posted by Razimus
My advice for those who are skeptical, watch the video, you won't get the bulk of the information in a single example.

I watched it, and I don't think the findings are conclusive. If you feel you don't want to spend any more time on it, that's fine, but I won't say what you've presented is conclusive.

A linguistic expert could confirm it, a mathematician could confirm the chances of it this is something I leave for someone else.

Here are some words and terms highlighted by profilers looking at the linguistics in the unabomber's writing style:

* Chimerical
* Coreligionist
* Delimited
* Anomie
* Middle-class vacuity
* Cool-headed logicians

The most common terms were society, power, technology, freedom, autonomy, liberty and psychology. These phrases are important because they are unusual and unique. The terms used are important because they show the writer's main subjects of interest.

Your phrase matches include things like 'can have a drastic impact on' and 'is based on the number of'. The majority of the phrases I read are all phrases I use on a regular basis. I also am prone sometimes to avoiding contractions in language. I am fairly certain I'm not a time traveler except in the rather linear sense of moving forward.

Your uncommon phrase list is:

* streamlined
* autonomous
* syntax
* vectors
* hawking
* thwart
* baseline
* snapshot
* exponentially
* inherent
* infrastructure
* periodically

Again all terms I have used, and a great many of them common in the fields we're talking about.

Snapshot is a very common IT term. Infrastructure is a very common IT term. Syntax is a very common IT term. None of the phrases are particularly unique or uncommon in context. You're also dealing with a potentially huge data set, which can make your results seem much more meaningful than they are.

I'm assuming your video is the highlights of the study of your dataset, which means that you are having to use phrases such as 'in the last few months' as an example of shared writing styles. The case against the unabomber using linguistics is (no offense) a solid brick wall in comparison to the evidence you're presenting here ... and linguistics isn't exactly a bulls eye in a courtroom at the best of times in the first place.

Linguistics as evidence requires other back up evidence often and, without a unique writer, it can be inconclusive. The one thing you have going for you is a large data set, but on the other hand it's not as if you're checking to see if two letters claiming to be the same person are the same person ... you're comparing two people you think might be the same person with little other presented evidence and potentially quite large datasets which can skew results.

Forensic Linguists have had some successes in scoring search warrants and the like, but the way you've described writing style as a 'fingerprint' I believe is very misleading. It's a tool to help assemble a profile, it can provide back ground information about a person, but it is by its very nature probabilistic like the rest of profiling, and far more so than a fingerprint or blood sample.

I'm not a 'Titorist'. I think it's a rather poorly assembled hoax unless I'm entirely wrong, and there are multiple universes with different physical laws in them.

I just think you're exaggerating your discovery and being sucked into the mythical 'profiling' meme. To paraphrase a response to a rather famous profile,"right, so we're just looking for a guy that hates his mother."

My response to yours would be ... "so we're just looking for an IT nerd that reads Stephen Hawking and hates Apple."

For Blues: Morey Haber is the name.

Originally posted by Razimus

The truth has come to light. Out of the people who use the 6 word phrases "can have a drastic impact on" and "is based on the number of", how many of them also use these words:

streamlined
autonomous
syntax
vectors
hawking
thwart
baseline
snapshot
exponentially
inherent
infrastructure
periodically
CAD
UNIX

I can tell you didn't watch the entire 40 minute video.

How many of them use the word "inherent" in the context of discussing computers?

How many of them use the word "infrastructure" in the context of discussing computers?

How many of them use the word "streamlined" in the context of discussing government?

How many of them use the word "measurements" in the context of discussing gravity?

The list goes on and on. How many people do you know use the word "vectors" & "snapshot"?

The list goes on and on.

I did in fact what the entire video and just for the record I do not subscribe to the John Titor story and I believe the whole thing to be nothing more than an elaborate fantastical story. But again, this video is not 100% proof. You have no other evidence to back this up. It stands solely on the grounds of linguistics alone, which I am sorry to say is not enough to finger someone for the JT writings. Especially since the matches are of common technical phrases/words.

If you could have found something truly unique, like, I dunno.. "heuristically unreachable dramatization" in both writings then you MIGHT be on to something. But even then, not enough to announce a 100% positive match by any means. You need to dig deeper and find a solid link between the two people to back up your linguistic evidence to convince the masses. This is your project, and you have obviously put a LOT of time into it but the evidence presented did not convince me of a link between the two writers.

X

reply to post by Ex_CT2


Alls you have to do is watch the vid to find out who it is??? Don't need a google account for that??

Errr right ?

Yep, how's that civil war working out that Titor predicted.

Please, this guy was a crackpot. Considering hes a time traveler and not someone predicting the future, you'd expect everything he says to be 100% accurate.

Debunked

is it that time of the year again?

reply to post by Razimus


Ridiculous, words like thwart, snapshot, streamlined etc are not uncommon, neither is not using contractions.

Infrastructure in relation to computers is also common, as an IT tech I can vouch for that.

There are many flaws in your evidence, too many to mention here.

Obviously both people have a good understand of computer systems, and use similar language which is common amongst techs/programmers etc.

Whilst I cannot say John Titor wasn't Morey Haber, you cannot say they are one and the same from the evidence you have presented.

Clutching at straws....is that an uncommon phrase?


I'm 24 minutes into the video, your belief that streamlined is an uncommon word is silly at best.

Sorry to sound harsh.....but you seem to think that if you yourself don't use a word (like vectors) then it is uncommon.


ETA: I'm stopping at 26 minutes, you are way off with your analysis, there are more holes in it than the original Titor story....sorry.

I am still digesting the data you have compiled in the video,...

...But I Beg You, PLEASE... move your arms and hands less,.. I feel like I am being flyswatted right and left watching this!


Repetetively!

Originally posted by Hopechest
Yep, how's that civil war working out that Titor predicted.

Please, this guy was a crackpot. Considering hes a time traveler and not someone predicting the future, you'd expect everything he says to be 100% accurate.

Debunked

Your reply shows quite clearly that you have never actually read the Titor posts. You have a very tall horse, Hopechest.

So Razimus, you're not John Titor anymore? I don't feel like asking 3 times.

Originally posted by tracehd1
reply to post by Ex_CT2

 

Alls you have to do is watch the vid to find out who it is??? Don't need a google account for that??

Errr right ?

I suppose I could watch. In fact I tried to watch, and ended up skipping through it looking for the "reveal." Never did find it. I've no desire to waste 40+ minutes on it when the OP could just as easily have handed us the answer. Then I might watch it....