1

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Now Playing

« on: June 09, 2023, 02:12:25 PM »

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 09, 2023, 11:25:50 AM »

More emotional investment in Trump is a win for the social engineers.

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Aliens!

« on: June 07, 2023, 02:33:08 PM »

People in the UFO circles have been yelling about this shit happening for the past few years now. And yeah, Bob Lazar is allegedly also a whistleblower but he sucks tbh and people in the UFO circles don't even care for him.

What? That's not true, I love Bob and so do many others. His story remains consistent even now after all the years.

General opinion is that he's a grifter who lies about everything and has done more harm than good. Some people do believe him but at the very least he is extremely divisive and I feel like you'd know that if you actually had an interest in this stuff.

https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/c4r0lw/whats_the_deal_with_bob_lazar/
https://www.reddit.com/r/mystery/comments/sqt2ai/is_bob_lazar_full_of_shit_his_interesting_stories/
https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/12vnead/what_do_people_here_think_of_bob_lazar/

Reddit is a UFO circle now?? You can't be serious.

Not to mention that pretty much any general opinions on Reddit are wrong.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Aliens!

« on: June 07, 2023, 02:22:30 PM »

People in the UFO circles have been yelling about this shit happening for the past few years now. And yeah, Bob Lazar is allegedly also a whistleblower but he sucks tbh and people in the UFO circles don't even care for him.

What? That's not true, I love Bob and so do many others. His story remains consistent even now after all the years.

5

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Now Playing

« on: June 07, 2023, 01:58:45 PM »

6

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 07, 2023, 12:15:06 PM »

Before you were saying different standards of proof; now it's different levels of proof?
What you're really saying is different standards of evidence, and different levels of evidence.
Proof is absolute by definition, that's why it's different than evidence.

I agree that proof is absolute, but people use the word in a fairly loose way - like the way people now use "literally" for emphasis when then don't mean something literally happened.
Or they qualify it like in the court setting where something has to be "proven beyond reasonable doubt".
There is acknowledgement there that this is not absolute proof, and as you've noted this can lead to miscarriages of justice. There was a good example in the press recently when a women who'd spent 20 years in prison in Australia for murdering her 4 children was released when it was found there could have been some genetic condition the kids all had. That created the reasonable doubt.
Which is the exact point. "Beyond reasonable doubt" is held up to be a high standard of "proof", but it can yield incorrect results. The type of absolute proof you are claiming only exists within the world of mathematics.

"Proven beyond reasonable doubt" is a redundancy because proof being absolute means it's beyond reasonable doubt.

The courts rely on evidence, they convict people all the time based on evidence. But scientific facts don't get decided in court, that's one more thing you don't understand.

"The type of absolute proof you are claiming only exists within the world of mathematics.". Are you f-ing serious? That's your claim, not mine. If you keep lying like that, I'm going to add you to my ignore list.

How did I know that you would come up with the argument that "well, I don't know that anything is real because illusions exist, so everything could be an illusion and everyone could be an illusionist playing a trick on me.".

That is literally your argument about NASA. "Everything they do is an illusion, it's all fake".
Your logical inconsistency is mind-boggling, dude.

Quote me saying those exact words. Another lie. You've been strawmanning with the NASA crap from the beginning, talking about the ISS and things I never mentioned.

CGI is not an illusion, it's CGI. That's not an argument. You're deplorably using the argument that you used in your previous comment where you try to convince people that someone jumping in front of you is not proof that they can jump and flipping it on me disbelieving the CGI that NASA produces - it's not going to work.

The only one being logically inconsistent is you. And it's very obvious that you need to be logically inconsistent because you have nothing but your beliefs and narratives that have nothing to do with scientific fact.

7

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 07, 2023, 09:31:49 AM »

You have this pattern of deciding that a response is good, and recycling it ad infinitum even if you keep getting absolutely curbstomped over it.

Or, an alternative view is that I don't accept I've been curbstomped over it.
You have a pattern of thinking you're very right about something and getting cross if anyone suggests you're not.

Obviously I accept that there are different levels of proof - when Trump was pwned recently it was on the "preponderance of evidence", because it was a Civil trial. In a criminal trial you need to prove things "beyond reasonable doubt". Then there's mathematical proof which is absolute. But it's this last form that Duality appears to be talking about.
He keeps saying "evidence isn't proof". He's right, but the first two kinds of proof are evidence based. Which leads me to conclude he's talking about absolute proof, which isn't possible in the way he imagines.

Before you were saying different standards of proof; now it's different levels of proof?

What you're really saying is different standards of evidence, and different levels of evidence.

Proof is absolute by definition, that's why it's different than evidence.

Example: There's a bunch of evidence that Sasquatch exists, but there's no proof that Sasquatch exists until someone puts a Sasquatch on the table. Now, obviously I understand the skeptic point of view that: "well, it could be a hyper-realistic doll that looks like a Sasquatch, or something else that we already know about.". That's why we have scientific techniques to determine if it's really a Sasquatch or not.

all you have to do is understand that proof doesn't exist outside of the limited language of mathematics.

Oh, it doesn't? If I jump in front of you, that's not proof that I can jump?

No. It's evidence.
I mean, I saw Penn and Teller one time and Teller produced a load of coins out of thin air.
That's proof he can create them out of nothing, yes? That's what I saw him do.
Do you see the problem?

You're just a mouthpiece for mainstream narratives with no brain of its own, and you're not fooling anybody with your mainstream-approved sophistry that you get from Google.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

How did I know that you would come up with the argument that "well, I don't know that anything is real because illusions exist, so everything could be an illusion and everyone could be an illusionist playing a trick on me.". The answer is, try banging your head against the wall and tell me if the wall (and your head) is an illusion or not.

Pathetic argument that only 20 year-olds brainwashed by solipsism are making. Not ad-hominem, just saying that I only ever hear this argument from 20 year-old snowflakes, and you definitely fit that profile.

8

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 06, 2023, 06:22:33 PM »

all you have to do is understand that proof doesn't exist outside of the limited language of mathematics.

Oh, it doesn't? If I jump in front of you, that's not proof that I can jump? You're just a mouthpiece for mainstream narratives with no brain of its own, and you're not fooling anybody with your mainstream-approved sophistry that you get from Google.

By your own logic of course it isn't. It's evidence. Pretty strong evidence. But maybe something else was going on. You might be incapable of jumping, but just as you bent down Zeus took pity on you and lifted you up in invisibly.

People like you who follow mainstream jumping just don't understood the truth of invisibly Zeus lifting

Absolute clown comment. 🤡

9

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 06, 2023, 05:26:35 PM »

all you have to do is understand that proof doesn't exist outside of the limited language of mathematics.

Oh, it doesn't? If I jump in front of you, that's not proof that I can jump? You're just a mouthpiece for mainstream narratives with no brain of its own, and you're not fooling anybody with your mainstream-approved sophistry that you get from Google.

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Aliens!

« on: June 06, 2023, 02:50:24 PM »

Huge news.

But don't worry, the Earth is still a ball revolving around the Sun because the aliens came through a wormhole from their own ball planet & heliocentric system located billions of light years away.

11

Flat Earth Community / Re: Intuitive understanding of the world.

« on: June 06, 2023, 10:41:34 AM »

I’ve gotten plenty of people to become round earthers again through calm logical discussion, and continue to do so.

To be blunt, I doubt that. It sounds like you found a few trolls who eventually gave up on trying to make you angry.

If I had to guess, I would say that a couple of his uni friends (he said he's a uni student) saw some FE material on TikTok and it made them question a couple of things for like 5 minutes before Realestfake, being the FE debunker that he thinks he is, linked them to flatearth.ws (one of the favorite resources of FE debunkers) explanations and they were convinved. In other words, he converted a total of 0 flat-earthers back to the globe religion.

Sound about right, Realestfake?

12

Flat Earth Community / Re: Intuitive understanding of the world.

« on: June 06, 2023, 06:59:16 AM »

LOL "our collective mental models of physics" says it all.

What a noobish rant. This shows that you know nothing about the subject of FE. No one claims that if the Earth was a globe planes would go to space except people who equally know nothing about the subject. But I already know that globe believers love strawmanning flat-earthers. "How does the mirror know what’s behind the paper” = flat-earther - That's a new one. Now you're getting desperate, son.

13

Flat Earth Media / Re: NASA: Going Nowhere Since 1958

« on: June 06, 2023, 06:02:33 AM »

I actually bothered to watch it while working.
Literally says nothing, this isn’t “dangerous” at all. Conspiracy grifting nonsense.

I'm sure Realestfake's opinion that it "literally says nothing" and that it's "conspiracy grifting nonsense" really matters to everyone here.

14

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 06, 2023, 05:58:00 AM »

Lol at quoting the “pear shaped” thing
Painfully obviously meant playfully as “a sphere but morphed 0.0001% into a pear shape”.

That a fact?

15

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 06, 2023, 05:30:24 AM »

Try understanding the difference between evidence and proof before you dip your toes in that, though.

Well, in science, evidence is data collected but proof isn't really a thing.  It's more or less the result when you have a sufficient weight of evidence to be pretty sure that you've come to the correct conclusion.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200811/common-misconceptions-about-science-i-scientific-proof

So, what's your distinction between the two?

I thought you said there was proof for the globe, but the problem was that I wouldn't accept it? Now that I told you I would accept it, you had to switch the narrative to the mainstream narrative that there's no such thing as scientific proof. Unfortunately for thou, I am more than familiar with that narrative. The only reason it's mainstream nowawdays is because they know they have no proof for the big theories such as the globe, relativity, evolution, virology, etc. Because they're simply not true. So really, the ones saying there's no such thing as scientific proof and that science is all about theories, credibility and consensus are the ones who are not the real scientists.

The biggest misconception in mainstream science is that facts are evidence-dependent and that they can change at any moment as soon as the next batch of contradictory evidence is accepted by the consensus. In other words, they (the mainstream morons) want you to believe that there's no such thing as truth, or that truth is based on consensus. This shows that science is no longer an honest pursuit and that it has been corrupted to the core. Hence, why we got so many so-called scientists who believe in absurdities such as the globe. Meanwhile, the real scientists who know we don't live on an absurdity get marginalized and ridiculed.

The mainstream morons are nothing but a bunch of ZEALOUS BULLIES. You can see that when people such as Mr. Dawkins is hailed as a hero of mainstream science for being a bully vs. creationists, for example. Same thing with people such as deGrasse Tyson being a bully vs. flat-earthers, even though his most famous claims are "that stuff is flat!" and "it's pear-shaped".

Did you know that deGrasse Tyson was scheduled to have a debate with Dubay on JRE but it got cancelled? Yes, that is a fact. I'm not the biggest Dubay fan, but the fact that the mainstream heroes are avoiding scientific debate with certain people should give you a clue that they're all about pushing a narrative, and that those certain people are dangerous to the narrative. Not that science is about debates - the debates are meant for public forums such as the aforementioned JRE, not for scientific research or progress. And not that I'm mad that people like deGrasse Tyson exist either, I actually find him hilarious. But he is a priest, nothing more. Like I said before in one of my other comments, he probably knows that the Earth is flat and is playing a role. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case.

16

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 05, 2023, 10:48:06 PM »

So in other words, no proof that it's a globe? I thought so.

Well, none that you would accept.

I will accept proof. You got some?

Try understanding the difference between evidence and proof before you dip your toes in that, though.

17

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 05, 2023, 09:59:18 PM »

That's the point. For you globe believers to realize there's no proof for your beliefs and that's why they are and will remain beliefs.

Actually, there is quite a lot of evidence that the earth is a globe that doesn't come from NASA or any government agency.  It's just a matter of whether or not you choose to accept any of that evidence.

So in other words, no proof that it's a globe? I thought so.

I already looked at all of that evidence. None of it means what you think it means (what you want to believe it means).

18

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 05, 2023, 03:13:56 PM »

The second of those statements cannot be proven. Many would say that the fact that the earth is a globe has been proven and yet here we are in the 21st century with some people claiming the reverse.

Yeah, they would say that - but sadly for them it's not true. :'( Being in the 21st century only helps you understand that better. But that's assuming that your true intention is to understand things for what they are.

"The earth is a globe" cannot be proven to the standard you require, and can only be based on evidence. Then clearly the same can be said of "The earth is not a globe".
One could argue that the known distances between places proves that the earth has to be a globe

There's no such thing as "standards of proof" because the proof itself should be the standard. Understand? I don't care how much evidence you think you have because evidence ≠ proof.

I don't care what "one could argue" either, I only care about facts.

I'm not clear what this means. No-one sensible claims that curvature can be discerned from "normal" altitudes, and I include commercial airplane travel in that.

It is clear.

19

Flat Earth Media / Re: New Photos of Moon suggest Flat Earth?

« on: June 05, 2023, 09:54:56 AM »

LOL. If truth exists independently of beliefs, how is there not a difference between believing and knowing other than subjective certainty? See?

No, I don't see.
Of course truth exists independently of belief. I mean, let's take the shape of the Earth. The Earth is a physical object, yes? It has a shape. That shape doesn't depend on your belief about it, or mine, or anyone else's.

If the earth is flat then it is flat whatever you or I believe. If it's a globe then it's a globe whatever you or I believe.
It can't be flat for you because you believe it to be and a globe for me because I believe it to be.
If you believe it's flat and I believe it's a globe then there are only two possibilities:

1) One of us is wrong
2) Both or us are wrong (it could be a cube).

We cannot both be correct because we believe contradictory things. The truth of the matter is absolute and it is independent of our beliefs about it.

Correct, it can't be a globe and flat at the same time. I suppose it has a shape, but flat is not a shape - it's about the surface. As far as I'm concerned, FE fundamentally is about KNOWING that there's no curvature, and therefore no globe.

The only semantic difference between these three sentences:
"I think the earth is a globe"
"I believe the earth is a globe"
"I know the earth is a globe"

Is the level of certainty you're expressing. A lot of people "know" that Aled Jones sang Walking In The Air in The Snowman (he didn't) or that Vikings had horns on their helmets (they didn't). Saying you "know" something doesn't make you correct, you're just saying you're certain about something. You can be certain and wrong at the same time.

You don't say? Even if they express different levels of certainty, all those are subjective claims. Irrelevant to science or objective truth. A true, objective statment would be: "You can't square a circle". Or, "The Earth is not a globe.". Why? Because it can be proven. No beliefs required.

There is a difference between blind belief and evidence based belief, but evidence based belief is the reason that innocent people get convicted of crimes they didn't commit, all the time. That's what you're supporting.

It's not merely that I'm supporting it. It's the only game in town.
The only way to come to a belief about pretty much anything is by assessing the evidence. What else is there?
You simultaneously demand proof - I see you're doing it in another thread here:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=20002.msg280628#msg280628
While in this thread you're accepting that that proof cannot exist.

That's the point. For you globe believers to realize there's no proof for your beliefs and that's why they are and will remain beliefs. Starting with your belief in curvature that isn't there.

Of course I'm incredulous of anything NASA produces. That's actually a compliment. Thank you.

It's neither a compliment nor an insult. If you blindly believe everything you're told by an authority then that's foolish.
But if you blindly disbelieve everything you're told by an authority then that's equally foolish.

Oh, that's okay - even if you didn't mean it as a compliment I took it as a compliment because it is in fact not equally foolish. Disbelieving is my bread and butter.

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: There is no LGBT agenda within the government.

« on: June 04, 2023, 11:26:25 PM »

One of the things that shocked me about the SOGI website was how a message popped up asking for donations to "Help protect the freedoms of 2SLGBTQ+ youth this PRIDE month!". Like what in Satan's name is 2SLGBTQ+? Could they even say 2SLGBTQIA+ and get away with it? Sounds like something Elon would come up with as a name for his child.

It definitely seems worse than I thought, I'll give you that.