Ever since my video "The Real John Titor" was uploaded I have been getting emails from someone on the inside. I respect this person, and they have shown a great amount of respect for the hard work I've put into this. I can confirm they are who they say they are, it's not an imposter. This post alone may jeopardize their want to continue emailing me, but I have promised this person I won't reveal their exact name, nor a few sensitive pieces of information. I've been doing this for 9 years, I have received dozens and dozens of bogus tips from anonymous tipsters. I know the difference between an anonymous coward and a real person, this person is real. I'm not sure the tti/youtube crowd are ready for this information, I may wish to release an edited version of these emails in 2013, but due to the lack of respect being shown for the hard work I've put into this I will probably wait until 2014. The emails themselves contain a great amount of evidence, a great amount.
That's all I'm going to say at this point, the haters will scoff, but those who recognize truth when they read it, they will know I'm telling the truth. Thanks to people like Jimmy Mayo this world isn't a complete cesspool. I'm not a debunker, a debunker assumes something and uses any strategy to disprove something based on that assumption. I'm an investigator, amateur or not, I build a case based on facts, here are the facts;
2004: My case was that Gerald O'Docharty might be John Titor because he used the very rare terms "gravity lock" & "local gravity" on the internet in 1997, he was the only human known to man (based on internet searches) that used these terms prior to John Titor using them in 2000.
2009: My case was that Richard Haber might be John Titor because of his unusual association and appearance on a TV show which was interviewing Larry about Titor. In addition to this the PO Box that clearly stated "John Titor" and "John R. Haber".
2013: My case was that Morey Haber might be John Titor because of the 1,000+ exact phrase matches, many of them significant, some being used in the same odd context, using rare words like "vector". Apparently everyone you meet uses the word "vector", good for you, I haven't met a single person in my entire life that has ever used this word in a sentence. The linguistic fingerprint is there, it's invisible to anyone who wants it to be invisible, but it's clear as day for anyone who wants it to be clear as day I understand the position concerning this. There are 2 ways to find further results, I can't directly conduct a scientific blind comparison, because it would be claimed I was biased. I can't hire an expert forensic linguist, if I worked for a show like Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura I would have already done so.
The above 3 cases are based on facts, cold hard facts, a debunker doesn't focus on facts, a debunker will pick any convenient excuse and they will use these convenient excuses to 'prove' something is false. If you haven't noticed, I've done the exact opposite, I've worked hard at finding these facts, it's the exact opposite behavior of a debunker, it's the behavior of an investigator that focuses on the facts.