LogFAQs > #929442977

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Do they explain why the T-800 looks older in the new Terminator movies?
GEKGanon 10/30/19 5:21:16 PM #23:	Foppe posted... GEKGanon posted... Skynet thinks it can score a victory against John by preventing him from being born, but why would it even think this is a viable strategy if John's birth is only prevented in a DIFFERENT timeline, one in which the Skynet that sends back the assassin DOESN'T BENEFIT? Either Skynet doesnt know that it wont affect the current timeline, or it doesnt care as long as it results in a timeline where it wins. Skynet is fighting a war, and the entire premise of the film is that Skynet sends an assassin back in time as a means of breaking a stalemate in the war. It would be absolutely pointless for Skynet to drum up this plan as a means of winning another Skynet's war, just as it would be silly for John to send Kyle back to stop it, since doing so wouldn't even matter in his own timeline. But John sends Kyle back anyway, because he already knows from Sarah that Kyle is his father, and needs to go back in order for John to be born. Regardless, the entire time travel plot is very silly to begin with; John Connor's very existence in the future should be a big red flag to Skynet that the plan to kill him doesn't work. Even if the assassination did work, Skynet wouldn't even know it worked, because it would simply exist in a world that never had a John Connor in it. Although, that then creates the paradox that, if John Connor never existed, Skynet would never send a Terminator back to kill Sarah in the first place... it becomes the entire paradox whereby if you invent a time machine to fix something, fixing that thing means you no longer have the reason to invent the time machine, which means you never go back and fix it. --- Steam Name: gekganon <cite>GEKGanon posted [p:929442977] in Do they ex... [t:78105492]...</cite> <quote>Foppe posted...</cite> <quote>GEKGanon posted...</cite> <quote>Skynet thinks it can score a victory against John by preventing him from being born, but why would it even think this is a viable strategy if John's birth is only prevented in a DIFFERENT timeline, one in which the Skynet that sends back the assassin DOESN'T BENEFIT?</quote> Either Skynet doesnt know that it wont affect the current timeline, or it doesnt care as long as it results in a timeline where it wins.</quote> Skynet is fighting a war, and the entire premise of the film is that Skynet sends an assassin back in time as a means of breaking a stalemate in the war. It would be absolutely pointless for Skynet to drum up this plan as a means of winning another Skynet's war, just as it would be silly for John to send Kyle back to stop it, since doing so wouldn't even matter in his own timeline. But John sends Kyle back anyway, because he already knows from Sarah that Kyle is his father, and needs to go back in order for John to be born. Regardless, the entire time travel plot is very silly to begin with; John Connor's very existence in the future should be a big red flag to Skynet that the plan to kill him doesn't work. Even if the assassination did work, Skynet wouldn't even know it worked, because it would simply exist in a world that never had a John Connor in it. Although, that then creates the paradox that, if John Connor never existed, Skynet would never send a Terminator back to kill Sarah in the first place... it becomes the entire paradox whereby if you invent a time machine to fix something, fixing that thing means you no longer have the reason to invent the time machine, which means you never go back and fix it. --- Steam Name: gekganon</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1