The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: PeasOnPizza on December 01, 2018, 02:10:17 AM
-
As a person new to the flat earth community, I would like to know how many people in the community believe in other conspiracy theories, like the anti-vaxx movement?
-
I don't believe in conspiracy theories. There is enough disparaging evidence against NASA that it is merely factual informtion.
-
I don't believe in conspiracy theories. There is enough disparaging evidence against NASA that it is merely factual informtion.
Such as?
-
I don't believe in conspiracy theories. There is enough disparaging evidence against NASA that it is merely factual informtion.
By definition, you do:
con·spir·a·cy the·o·ry
noun
noun: conspiracy theory; plural noun: conspiracy theories
the theory that an event or phenomenon occurs as a result of a conspiracy between interested parties; spec. a belief that some covert but influential agency (typically political in motivation and oppressive in intent) is responsible for an unexplained event
-
Now what are the definitions of theory and fact?
Theory: “Gravity is a force that attracts masses to each other”
Fact: “I held a ball at shoulder height, and when I released it, it met with the floor”
One is a theory and the other is a fact. The massive amount of evidence against NASA, in my opinion, leans more towards the fact side.
You can go on a weeks-long investigation for yourself, if curious on the matter. The resources are out there. I was asked on what I believed.
-
A fact is simply something which is true. Paris is the capital of France. That is a fact, Paris is defined as the capital. Beliefs don’t come into it, I can believe that Marseille is the capital of France but that doesn’t make it true. Someone believing that NASA are faking everything doesn’t make it a fact. Nor does believing that NASA are legitimate make that true of course but GPS works, Satellite TV works, Satellite phones work and so on. Rockets demonstrably lift off. Where do they go? Hundreds of people have now been to space, 7 of them were space tourists. There are weather satellites used by meteorologists, satellites taking regular pictures of the globe earth, lots of film from the ISS - an object which can be seen from earth.
To believe that there is a big cover up globally to pretend space travel is possible, fake all this footage from space, get all these people to lie about having been to space, make all this technology work in some other way other than satellites and fake a visible ISS somehow is a massive conspiracy theory. A lot of people would have to conspire to make all that happen. The only evidence I’ve seen for that conspiracy is a load of supposition and confirmation bias. But FE have to believe in this conspiracy because if space travel is real and satellites are orbiting the globe then clearly the earth cannot be flat.
As for a theory, the problem with that word is that in general use the word is used to mean a vague idea. In science though a theory is a model which explains observations and can predict the outcome of experiments. If those predictions fail then the theory should be amended or discarded.
-
Someone believing that NASA are faking everything doesn’t make it a fact.
The evidence of NASA's fraud makes it a fact.
-
Someone believing that NASA are faking everything doesn’t make it a fact.
The evidence of NASA's fraud makes it a fact.
No, it doesn’t.
A fact is simply something which is true.
Something can be a fact even if not many people to believe it to be so and something can be false even though many people do believe it.
You may believe the evidence for a conspiracy is compelling but you believing that evidence doesn’t make it factual. My believing the opposite doesn’t make that a fact either of course but I’ve laid out at a high level the evidence for space travel and satellites being real, and NASA are far from the only space agency. The satellites which make my TV work were not launched by NASA and I know my dish is pointing at something because when a neighbour blocked the dish with some scaffolding I lost signal. I’ve also seen dishes in Sri Lanka which are pointing up at a steep angle which tallies with a geostationary satellite above the equator as is claimed.
-
Have you, or anyone, gone through all evidence to show what is clearly fraud is not fraud? No. That has not been done. Therefore the evidence stands, and remains evidence of fraud.
-
Have you, or anyone, gone through all evidence to show what is clearly fraud is not fraud? No. That has not been done. Therefore the evidence stands, and remains evidence of fraud.
"As of November 6, 2013, a total of 536 people from 38 countries have gone into space according to the FAI guideline (543 people have qualified when including the US Department of Defense classification). Of the 536, three people completed only a sub-orbital flight, 533 people reached Earth orbit, 24 traveled beyond low Earth orbit and 12 walked on the Moon.
Space travelers have spent over 29,000 man-days (or a cumulative total of over 77 years) in space including over 100 man-days of spacewalks."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_travelers_by_name
None of us are one of these folks. Therefore, it’s not a fact to you or me that they went to space or not as we did not personally go to space nor are part of a ruse to make it look like we did. Therefore, the legitimacy or lack thereof of space travel is a theory to us.
If you believe, based upon evidence, that none of these people have actually been to space then we are being lied to. And to perpetuate the lie, multiple people/entities are involved. That is what defines a conspiracy.
Based upon the definitions in our common language makes not believing that space travel has occurred a conspiracy theory. And there’s nothing wrong with that. But to say you don’t believe in a conspiracy theory when it actually is one is simply not an accurate statement.
-
Is the story of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg's conspiracy against the United States Government considered a "conspiracy theory," or is it considered a conspiracy fact?
It's conspiracy fact. Why is it fact? Because there was mounting unexplainable evidence against them to show it as fact.
-
Sorry, I fail to see the logic of comparing a convicted spy ring to anything relevant here.
-
It's entirely relevant. It's fact. Not theory.
The situation here is that you are attempting to dismiss evidence as "conspiracy theory". That is what it boils down to. Dismissal is the best counter-argument we can expect, understandably.
-
It's entirely relevant. It's fact. Not theory.
The situation here is that you are attempting to dismiss evidence as "conspiracy theory". That is what it boils down to. Dismissal is the best counter-argument we can expect, understandably.
I am not dismissing anything. Your conspiracy theory is that space travel doesn’t exist is just as valid as my theory that it does. We both have evidence that we believe supports our positions, neither of which are fact without you or I being part of a faked or legitimate space mission. I’m not even calling into question what you deem as evidence for your belief. The fact of that matter is that your theory requires a conspiracy (of planetary proportions because we're not just talking about NASA here, but all space travel), hence the term ‘conspiracy theory'. It just is what it is.
-
All the people in the Mars lander control room celebrating the 'successful' landing on Mars must all be in on the conspiracy. You can see that most of them are sitting in front on a computer screen intently watching something. Maybe NASA screens their applicants not so much on any scientific abilities but on acting abilities. If the people in the control room really are scientists and actually think the data that they are seeing really is from Mars then NASA must really have another 'back' room somewhere that feeds the scientists fake data and pictures from Mars. Who knows what is really true? Who are the real conspirators? No matter where the real conspiracy really happens to be the amount of effort must be tremendous and take countless employees located somewhere. All of them must be kept quiet or the whole thing would be bust wide open. Is it possible that North Korea could be the real source of the NASA control room data? That actually makes a certain amount of sense. Any North Korean who tried to 'spill the beans' would just be promptly shot. The other possibility is that the control room data could be coming from one of the permanent outposts in Antarctica. Of course the bottom line is that there's either a big NASA conspiracy to defraud the public or the Mars mission actually happened as described. Which is fact and which is just theory?
-
It's entirely relevant. It's fact. Not theory.
The situation here is that you are attempting to dismiss evidence as "conspiracy theory". That is what it boils down to. Dismissal is the best counter-argument we can expect, understandably.
It isn't the evidence that's being dismissed as "conspiracy theory". It's your interpretation of the evidence and the conclusions that you draw that are being dismissed as "conspiracy theory".
-
Is the story of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg's conspiracy against the United States Government considered a "conspiracy theory," or is it considered a conspiracy fact?
It's conspiracy fact. Why is it fact? Because there was mounting unexplainable evidence against them to show it as fact.
It is a fact they were tried and convicted and that means that it was shown beyond reasonable doubt that they were guilty.
So I guess that's pretty close to it being a fact.
Would the "evidence" against NASA or for a flat earth stand up to such scrutiny? You don't specify what evidence you are talking about but all the "evidence" I have seen has been baseless allegation and supposition. I've yet to hear about any evidence which would stand up to any scrutiny.
You seem to think NASA have the resources to pull off a conspiracy on this scale but are also incompetent enough to leave so much evidence of the conspiracy to make it obvious there is one. And, again, NASA are nowhere near the only space agency. They're the poster boys for space travel but lots of other agencies in lots of other countries would have to be in on it. The Russians and US would have to be colluding about the ISS, an object you can literally see from earth.
-
Is NASA guilty of murder? Think about it. If the space shuttle missions were all faked, then somehow all the shuttle mission crews must have been sequestered somewhere during the missions because obviously they couldn’t be at home while everyone thought they were in space. The world witnessed the Columbia and Challenger disasters where the whole crew ‘died’. If those NASA missions were faked, then either the whole crew on both those missions had to be murdered by NASA to enhance the conspiracy or at minimum somehow put into hiding somewhere. I suppose that they all could have received some surgery to alter their appearance and moved to a hiding place somewhere else but then any contact with anyone outside the conspiracy would have to be prohibited. None of the astronauts could ever again be in contact with any family member who wasn’t an insider in the conspiracy. Maybe someday a company like 23andMe will discover something and bust the whole conspiracy wide open. The other more obvious solution to the ‘problem’ would be that the NASA missions were all real.
-
Is NASA guilty of murder? Think about it. If the space shuttle missions were all faked, then somehow all the shuttle mission crews must have been sequestered somewhere during the missions because obviously they couldn’t be at home while everyone thought they were in space. The world witnessed the Columbia and Challenger disasters where the whole crew ‘died’. If those NASA missions were faked, then either the whole crew on both those missions had to be murdered by NASA to enhance the conspiracy or at minimum somehow put into hiding somewhere. I suppose that they all could have received some surgery to alter their appearance and moved to a hiding place somewhere else but then any contact with anyone outside the conspiracy would have to be prohibited. None of the astronauts could ever again be in contact with any family member who wasn’t an insider in the conspiracy. Maybe someday a company like 23andMe will discover something and bust the whole conspiracy wide open. The other more obvious solution to the ‘problem’ would be that the NASA missions were all real.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=8194.0
I think there's a wiki page on this too, but I can't recall for sure. But essentially think (poorly done) 'witness protection' for at least some members of the crew. This is honestly one of the weakest ideas to come from the space conspiracy in any way tbh.
-
It's entirely relevant. It's fact. Not theory.
The situation here is that you are attempting to dismiss evidence as "conspiracy theory". That is what it boils down to. Dismissal is the best counter-argument we can expect, understandably.
It isn't the evidence that's being dismissed as "conspiracy theory". It's your interpretation of the evidence and the conclusions that you draw that are being dismissed as "conspiracy theory".
Make sure to communicate that when we have a thread about what you believe.
I rely on evidence-based information. If there are videos of NASA commiting fraud then those need to be explained and justified. If they are not explained then it is NASA committing fraud.
It's pretty simple.
-
It's entirely relevant. It's fact. Not theory.
The situation here is that you are attempting to dismiss evidence as "conspiracy theory". That is what it boils down to. Dismissal is the best counter-argument we can expect, understandably.
It isn't the evidence that's being dismissed as "conspiracy theory". It's your interpretation of the evidence and the conclusions that you draw that are being dismissed as "conspiracy theory".
Make sure to communicate that when we have a thread about what you believe.
I rely on evidence-based information. If there are videos of NASA commiting fraud then those need to be explained and justified. If they are not explained then it is NASA committing fraud.
It's pretty simple.
This I think is where you step into 'conspiracy theory' territory. I've yet to see a 'NASA FRAUD!!!' video without a plausible explanation available either in the comments, or with a bit of research and/or common sense applied. Whether you accept those explanations is a whole other ballgame however. That's what sets apart the conspiracy theorist, from the space travel believer. The conspiracy theorist doesn't believe the explanations, and by virtue of the video being fake, believe there's a conspiracy happening. Regardless of if it's fact or fiction, as of right now believing NASA and the rest are faking space travel is believing there's a conspiracy going on. How does that NOT make it a conspiracy theory?
-
NASA is on trial. It is up to the public to decide on guilt. I've cast my vote. Many of those videos and exhibits are not reasonably explained.
I do not believe that I am engaging in a conspiracy theory any more than the jurors on the spy case thought they were engaging in a conspiracy theory.
-
NASA is on trial.
NASA is far from being "on trial" which is why it remains in the realm of "conspiracy theory."
-
NASA is on trial.
NASA is far from being "on trial" which is why it remains in the realm of "conspiracy theory."
Of course they are on trial. If I post a video and you can't explain it, then it's evidence of NASA's fraudulence.
-
NASA is on trial.
NASA is far from being "on trial" which is why it remains in the realm of "conspiracy theory."
Have you disproven all videos and exhibits of NASA's fraudulence to say that they are unimpeachable?
I personally haven't seen any that are fraudulent.
And remember, NASA isn't the only agency on the planet engaged in space travel.
-
NASA is on trial.
NASA is far from being "on trial" which is why it remains in the realm of "conspiracy theory."
Of course they are on trial. If I post a video and you can't explain it, then it's evidence of NASA's fraudulence.
If you post a video that I can't explain, that's just you and me Internet-talking. That's not a trial.
The classic conspiracy theory is some rando posting videos or publishing newsletters trying to draw attention to a conspiracy.
And me (or anyone) not being able to explain it to your satisfaction doesn't validate it.
The issue isn't the "conspiracy" part, right? True, false or just allegation, it's still "conspiracy" if something is being covered up.
The issue for you, it seems, is the "theory" part. You want it not to be seen as "theory" but proven fact. Sorry. It ain't. You can be as personally convinced and certain as you want to be, and YOU may believe NASA is "on trial." But you're on the margins. Disbelieving in NASA, and space exploration and exploitation in general whether NASA or not, is squarely in the bulls-eye of what is meant by "conspiracy theory."
-
You want it not to be seen as "theory" but proven fact. Sorry. It ain't.
The OP of this thread was asking what I believed. I answered. We can wait for him to post a thread asking what you believe.
-
You want it not to be seen as "theory" but proven fact. Sorry. It ain't.
The OP of this thread was asking what I believed. I answered. We can wait for him to post a thread asking what you believe.
Exactly. What you believe.
-
NASA is on trial. It is up to the public to decide on guilt. I've cast my vote. Many of those videos and exhibits are not reasonably explained.
And yet you are in the tiny minority with this view. That doesn’t make you wrong of course but while a troubling %age of people believe the moon landings were faked I don’t think many people believe that the whole of space travel is. If the evidence is as clear as you claim why is your belief not more common?
I do not believe that I am engaging in a conspiracy theory any more than the jurors on the spy case thought they were engaging in a conspiracy theory.
You have a theory that a lot of people are conspiring to fake space travel. I really don’t know what else to call it.
-
NASA is on trial. It is up to the public to decide on guilt. I've cast my vote. Many of those videos and exhibits are not reasonably explained.
And yet you are in the tiny minority with this view. That doesn’t make you wrong of course but while a troubling %age of people believe the moon landings were faked I don’t think many people believe that the whole of space travel is. If the evidence is as clear as you claim why is your belief not more common?
I do not believe that I am engaging in a conspiracy theory any more than the jurors on the spy case thought they were engaging in a conspiracy theory.
You have a theory that a lot of people are conspiring to fake space travel. I really don’t know what else to call it.
There are 72 government space agencies, 14 with launch capability and numerous private spaceflight companies, many with orbital capability.
If they are claimed to all fake space missions I would assert that has to involve belief in a huge conspiracy.
List of government space agencies (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_space_agencies)
As of 2018, 72 different government space agencies are in existence; 14 of those have launch capability. Six government space agencies—the China National Space Administration (CNSA), the European Space Agency (ESA), the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the Russian Federal Space Agency (RFSA or Roscosmos)—have full launch capabilities; these include the ability to launch and recover multiple satellites, deploy cryogenic rocket engines and operate extraterrestrial probes.
And in here is a List of private spaceflight companies (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_spaceflight_companies), many with orbital capability and some with interplanetary capability.
-
Do you think that each of those companies independently created rocket technology from scratch?
Is it possible for a company to register more than one business name?
Do you think that the government doesn't care about letting the knowledge to build ICBM delivery systems out in the open for all to have?
Do you think that the Mexican Space Agency is a real space agency, that developed its own rocket technologies, and put its own astronauts up onto the ISS with its own vehicle systems, or, do you think that they merely contract with NASA contractors?
-
Do you think that each of those companies each independently created rocket technology from scratch?
No, but much of the development was done in the USA, by Goddard, and in Germany, long before NASA
Is it possible for a company to register more than one business name?
That's quite irrelevant.
Do you think that the government doesn't care about letting the knowledge to build ICBM delivery systems out in the open for all to have?
Don't you agree that it is quite possible for countries to develop their own rocket technologies? NASA were not the first to:- successfully launch a satellite,
- have a man orbit the earth,
- hard land on the moon,
- fly-by the moon or
- soft land successfully on the Moon
So stop pretending that the US Government and NASA has any control over the rest of the world.
Would NASA have control over the China National Space Administration (CNSA), the National Aerospace Development Administration of North Korea (DPRK NADA) or the Iranian Space Agency?
I don't think so. NASA is the largest agency but remember that it is also the National Aeronautics Administration with responsibility in that area too.
You Americans don't run the world!
Do you think that the Mexican Space Agency is a real space agency, or do you think that they contract with NASA contractors?
That's quite irrelevant.
But your attempt to prove that NASA controls everything to do with space seems to verify that your think a worldwide conspiracy is involved.
I don't believe that NASA has this level of control and that believe that no such conspiracy is possible.
-
Do you think that the government doesn't care about letting the knowledge to build ICBM delivery systems out in the open for all to have?
I doubt that the government has much say in the matter any more. About all they can do is to have the FAA try to regulate the industry as best they can.
https://www.amazon.com/Engineering-Liquid-Propellant-Progress-Astronautics-Aeronautics/dp/1563470136
-
NASA is on trial.
NASA is far from being "on trial" which is why it remains in the realm of "conspiracy theory."
Of course they are on trial. If I post a video and you can't explain it, then it's evidence of NASA's fraudulence.
Or maybe you're just ignorant of the science behind what's happening. There's more than one option.
-
NASA is on trial.
NASA is far from being "on trial" which is why it remains in the realm of "conspiracy theory."
Of course they are on trial. If I post a video and you can't explain it, then it's evidence of NASA's fraudulence.
Or maybe you're just ignorant of the science behind what's happening. There's more than one option.
Wouldn't you be the ignorant one in that situation?
-
I rely on evidence-based information. If there are videos of NASA commiting fraud then those need to be explained and justified.
Best example of this evidence is ... what?
-
NASA is on trial.
NASA is far from being "on trial" which is why it remains in the realm of "conspiracy theory."
Of course they are on trial. If I post a video and you can't explain it, then it's evidence of NASA's fraudulence.
Or maybe you're just ignorant of the science behind what's happening. There's more than one option.
Wouldn't you be the ignorant one in that situation?
And I'm freely willing to admit that. However, for you, anything that you can't explain is automatically PROOF that NASA is lying.
-
NASA is on trial.
NASA is far from being "on trial" which is why it remains in the realm of "conspiracy theory."
Of course they are on trial. If I post a video and you can't explain it, then it's evidence of NASA's fraudulence.
Please post some peer reviewed videos.