Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #20 on: July 14, 2018, 04:12:20 PM »
I think it's harmless as heck. The shape of the earth is ***the furthest*** issue from what should actually be addressed, like curing cancer or ending world hunger. I don't care if I'm living on a triangle as long as our species can thrive on it.
I agree with that sentiment. I argue that curing cancer and ending world hunger require rational thought, logical reasoning, and solid facts. If you start preaching that "everyone's conclusions are equally valid," you're down the road away from reality. Major undertakings like curing cancer require the combined political will of an organized group of humanity. Right now, we're seeing a massive undercutting of logic and reason in out political structures around the world. That is dangerous. FE isn't dangerous. Undercutting belief in reality is dangerous.

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #21 on: July 27, 2018, 07:41:56 PM »
Anyway, being a scientist, I find it highly disturbing how silly believes can get and flat-earth has to be one of the top-runners. I don't particularly care if anyone believes in flat earth or not. But I do care when people are stubbornly convinced by nonsense, it is the worst thing you can possibly do. It only leads to misery and disaster, if you pick the wrong thing to be convinced by (luckily, flat-earth is harmless in that regard).
I agree with Sciratio's conclusion, but the views presented are too extreme. Being stubbornly convinced by nonsense is the worst thing you can possibly do?  Nope.  I can think of several things that are worse.  I'd say that presenting extreme values is probably right on par with stubborn nonsense.  Neither are the worst possible.
I do agree that a belief in a divergent earth shape is harmless.
There's nothing more dangerous than an idea, if it's the only one you have. -Émile Chartier

*

Offline Baby Thork

  • *
  • Posts: 2056
  • I am Baby Thork. Hear me roar!
    • View Profile
Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #22 on: July 28, 2018, 07:02:51 AM »
I think it's harmless as heck. The shape of the earth is ***the furthest*** issue from what should actually be addressed, like curing cancer or ending world hunger.

Wouldn't be much of a debate.


I believe we should make an effort to cure cancer and end world hunger. Is there anyone who disagrees and would like to debate the pros of cancer and people starving to death?
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #23 on: July 28, 2018, 08:54:29 AM »
I believe we should make an effort to cure cancer and end world hunger. Is there anyone who disagrees and would like to debate the pros of cancer and people starving to death?
Depends who the person is. It's like you've never heard of Piers Morgan.
And the only possible issue is if we as a species get so dumb that we can't research the important things. I don't think that's going to happen.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline Baby Thork

  • *
  • Posts: 2056
  • I am Baby Thork. Hear me roar!
    • View Profile
Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #24 on: July 28, 2018, 09:24:20 AM »
I believe we should make an effort to cure cancer and end world hunger. Is there anyone who disagrees and would like to debate the pros of cancer and people starving to death?
Depends who the person is. It's like you've never heard of Piers Morgan.
And the only possible issue is if we as a species get so dumb that we can't research the important things. I don't think that's going to happen.

Of course we have heard of Piers Morgan in the UK. And as we did with David Beckham and James Corden, when we get fed up of an over-exposed celebrity we send them to America so we don't have to listen to them any more.

I don't even know where you are going with the original debate. You changed the subject to whether humans will evolve to be more or less intelligent. Have you given up?
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #25 on: July 28, 2018, 11:54:03 AM »
1) "I like how the RE perspective is to just look at it from their own closed view of the world"

2) "If FET is true, it is not dangerous....Mainstream science has become a cult...."

3) "You are taught what people believe, not how it was developed, not why it is believed..."

4) "It doesn't tell people to gout out and hurt each other, it doesn't tell people to start risking their lives or doing anything close."

5) "And that's what sums it up, really. The danger is not FET, the danger is cults."

6) "FET tells us to think for ourselves, not to blindly follow, and it is blindly following that has gotten the world into the mess it now is."

Hi Jrowe. I picked out a few of your points which are worth discussion.

1) "I like how the RE perspective is to just look at it from their own closed view of the world"

I think if you thought a little bit harder before posting this somewhat petulant statement, you might appreciate that its hypocrisy. What perspective would you expect any person with a counter opinion to present with? Their own. Just as you look at things through your own perspectives - whatever they might be.

2) "If FET is true, it is not dangerous....Mainstream science has become a cult....".

Yes absolutely. if FET IS true, then it couldn't possibly be dangerous. It would be reality.

3) "You are taught what people believe, not how it was developed, not why it is believed...".

With all due respect, this is palpable nonsense. When scientific princples are taught, they are always related back to the first princples from which they originated. There are numerous examples - Pythagoras, Gallileo, Newton, Keppler as the tip of the iceberg. Yet FE believers, contradict the work of these great minds but offer nothing in return to explain the very obvious contradictions.

The very first lessons in mathematics that (presumably) any of us attended, would have been based around simple goemetry and how it was that something as (we now perceive) simple as a triangle had so many important ramifications in so many disciplines.

Now lets consider as most FE believers do, that all our known mathematics are wrong. (Because this is the only way, that a RE model could be fundamentally discounted. If a FE believer doesn't discount our known mathematics, then there is an insurmountable paradox: no believer in a FE model can also believe in modern mathematics.

This would mean that driving a car, or flying in a plane (which we can demonstably do - there are even FE pilots on here) can no longer be explained by our current mathematical models. If this is the case, then it is demonstrably up to the FE community to propose a new explanation. It's not sufficient to simply call modern science a "cult" or a "conspiracy". If you're right, then simply prove it. I will always listen to alternate theory - it's (ironically for FE) one of the central tenets of science - the offering of a counter theory and a proof by observable calculation. Why, for example, can't a FE (like Mad Mike Hughes in the US), go up to altitude or indeed travel to "underneath" the FE and prove the theory - or indeed conclude they are mistaken? Consider, the physical laws of circular motion, if the flat earth theory is correct, there would be utterly inexplicable problems explaing why someone living in northern Sweden experiences the exact same graviational forces as say, my living in Australia. In a FE theory, I should be being torn apart.... but I'm not. Now a single observation like that proves nothing, but if you apply a particular theory, then it should work for all applications - and our current mathematics, in my opinion, do.

So do you believe the scientists I listed above (and many more) simply got it all wrong? Or were they the start of the conspiracy? Pythagoras, Gallileo and Newton existed well before the US and NASA did - and predicted what is held in the mainstream to be the status quo - so why does FE continue to denigrate NASA (and accuse it of lying with faked pictures from space etc) and worldwide modern science?

Surely FEs would be targetting the very "founding fathers" of mathematics and their mathematical descriptions of the physical world?

Your point "You are taught what people believe, not how it was developed, not why it is believed..." should surely be challenging the ancient architects of modern day science - because if they were wrong, then everything is wrong.(*)

(*it should be noted that scientific theories are sometimes adapted not because they are necessarily wrong, but are not right in all circumstances - classically Newton's laws of motion at sub-light speed which do not work at speeds approaching light speed (as per Einsteins relativity).

4) "And that's what sums it up, really. The danger is not FET, the danger is cults."

Why is SE/modern science a cult, and FE not a cult?

5) "FET tells us to think for ourselves, not to blindly follow, and it is blindly following that has gotten the world into the mess it now is."

As said above, I absolutely agree thinking for ourselves and challenging the status quo is appropriate and (ironically for FE), is the basis for theuniversal approach to modern science.
So please explain why, having proposed a FE theory, has nobody made any tangible attempts to prove it as opposed to simply refuting the SE model? It seems "mad" mike Hughes is the only guy trying.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a19587128/self-taught-rocket-scientist-blasts-off/

Any open-minded scientist would listen to opposing theory - and that is why I am here.

Unfortuntaely, FET offers no such tangible proof. Instead, the whole movement relies on using memes and conspiracy theory to spread misinformation.

If FET is correct, it will be proveable - and as yet, no mathematical theory (or para-mathematical theory for that matter) has ever been offered.

Why?
« Last Edit: July 28, 2018, 04:04:39 PM by panicp »
I'm here for a serious discussion to challenge the flat earth myth.
As an evidence-based scientist, many might disagree with me.

That does NOT mean I accept or tolerate abuse, trolling, abruptly ending a conversation because I ask a question you cannot answer and especially the use of pseudo-science, or other non-evidence based data or untestable theories (without at least offering a proposed method of experiment). Clear enough?

*

Offline JRowe

  • *
  • Posts: 585
  • Slowly being driven insane by RE nonsense
    • View Profile
    • Dual Earth Theory
Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #26 on: July 28, 2018, 05:29:38 PM »
1) "I like how the RE perspective is to just look at it from their own closed view of the world"

I think if you thought a little bit harder before posting this somewhat petulant statement, you might appreciate that its hypocrisy. What perspective would you expect any person with a counter opinion to present with? Their own. Just as you look at things through your own perspectives - whatever they might be.
Instead of divorcing that sentence from its context, look at the very next line.

Quote
With all due respect, this is palpable nonsense. When scientific princples are taught, they are always related back to the first princples from which they originated.
That is simply not true. How old were you before you even heard the name, say, Cavendish? How many years before that were you told to believe in orbits?
Look how many people know tidbits like E=mc2 or the speed of light as a limit, but couldn't tell you what those letters stand for or why the speed of light is a limit; look how many noobs come in insisting UA's impossible because it'd lead to exceeding the speed of light. Look at how every science textbook and classroom is based on memorizing statements, not deriving them. What did you spend more time studying, the scientific method and how and why it works, or statements you wouldn't know how to derive? One of those is far more important, one of those should underpin everything you've learned.
I still remember when I was younger and bothered with religious debates, and one of the discussions I had was with a young earther, where I tried to use radiometric dating... and I got schooled, because class hadn't bothered with any of the crucial details of how it is we know it works. No mention of calibration curves, tree rings for shorter-term dating, how we know the relative amounts of various elements. We were just told that it's constant. Zero explanation for where that knowledge comes from, we're just expected to believe it.

It's a fundamental problem with the education system, and that's speaking as someone that grew up in the US and UK so I got a taste of both. So much of it is focused around being expected to memorise facts without understanding them.

Quote
Now lets consider as most FE believers do, that all our known mathematics are wrong. (Because this is the only way, that a RE model could be fundamentally discounted. If a FE believer doesn't discount our known mathematics, then there is an insurmountable paradox: no believer in a FE model can also believe in modern mathematics.
Utter rubbish. Instead of whinging that FEers dare disagree with you, try to respond to the actual discussion.
This is anotehr crucial problem. You are raised believing that observations and theory may as well be the same thing, that if we see something and RET has an answer, there is no possible way anything else could also explain it.

Quote
This would mean that driving a car, or flying in a plane (which we can demonstably do - there are even FE pilots on here) can no longer be explained by our current mathematical models. If this is the case, then it is demonstrably up to the FE community to propose a new explanation. It's not sufficient to simply call modern science a "cult" or a "conspiracy". If you're right, then simply prove it. I will always listen to alternate theory - it's (ironically for FE) one of the central tenets of science - the offering of a counter theory and a proof by observable calculation. Why, for example, can't a FE (like Mad Mike Hughes in the US), go up to altitude or indeed travel to "underneath" the FE and prove the theory - or indeed conclude they are mistaken? Consider, the physical laws of circular motion, if the flat earth theory is correct, there would be utterly inexplicable problems explaing why someone living in northern Sweden experiences the exact same graviational forces as say, my living in Australia. In a FE theory, I should be being torn apart.... but I'm not. Now a single observation like that proves nothing, but if you apply a particular theory, then it should work for all applications - and our current mathematics, in my opinion, do.
What the actual fuck are you talking about?

Quote
Your point "You are taught what people believe, not how it was developed, not why it is believed..." should surely be challenging the ancient architects of modern day science - because if they were wrong, then everything is wrong.(*)

(*it should be noted that scientific theories are sometimes adapted not because they are necessarily wrong, but are not right in all circumstances - classically Newton's laws of motion at sub-light speed which do not work at speeds approaching light speed (as per Einsteins relativity).
[/b]
Congrats, you just refuted your whole bs line of reasoning.

Quote

So please explain why, having proposed a FE theory, has nobody made any tangible attempts to prove it as opposed to simply refuting the SE model
A) We do.
B) Performed experiments don't cease existing or stop counting as evidence, if another model accounts for them better then it should be preferred.
C) As you pointed out, there is no consensus, what exactly would be the point of doing an experiment that a lot of us wouldn't expect to see anything odd with? I've been pitching an experiment a while, I just lack the resources to do it (and it wouldn't count for anything given anything I provide that dares be contrary to RET would be rejected out of hand), and it wouldn't mean anything to other FEers.
My DE model explained here.
Open to questions, but if you're curious start there rather than expecting me to explain it all from scratch every time.

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #27 on: July 28, 2018, 06:01:58 PM »
The simple use of measured distances to prove a shape seems to be beyond the ability of some.

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #28 on: July 29, 2018, 07:24:43 AM »
1) "I like how the RE perspective is to just look at it from their own closed view of the world"

I think if you thought a little bit harder before posting this somewhat petulant statement, you might appreciate that its hypocrisy. What perspective would you expect any person with a counter opinion to present with? Their own. Just as you look at things through your own perspectives - whatever they might be.
Instead of divorcing that sentence from its context, look at the very next line.

Quote
With all due respect, this is palpable nonsense. When scientific princples are taught, they are always related back to the first princples from which they originated.
That is simply not true. How old were you before you even heard the name, say, Cavendish? How many years before that were you told to believe in orbits?
Look how many people know tidbits like E=mc2 or the speed of light as a limit, but couldn't tell you what those letters stand for or why the speed of light is a limit; look how many noobs come in insisting UA's impossible because it'd lead to exceeding the speed of light. Look at how every science textbook and classroom is based on memorizing statements, not deriving them. What did you spend more time studying, the scientific method and how and why it works, or statements you wouldn't know how to derive? One of those is far more important, one of those should underpin everything you've learned.
I still remember when I was younger and bothered with religious debates, and one of the discussions I had was with a young earther, where I tried to use radiometric dating... and I got schooled, because class hadn't bothered with any of the crucial details of how it is we know it works. No mention of calibration curves, tree rings for shorter-term dating, how we know the relative amounts of various elements. We were just told that it's constant. Zero explanation for where that knowledge comes from, we're just expected to believe it.

It's a fundamental problem with the education system, and that's speaking as someone that grew up in the US and UK so I got a taste of both. So much of it is focused around being expected to memorise facts without understanding them.

Quote
Now lets consider as most FE believers do, that all our known mathematics are wrong. (Because this is the only way, that a RE model could be fundamentally discounted. If a FE believer doesn't discount our known mathematics, then there is an insurmountable paradox: no believer in a FE model can also believe in modern mathematics.
Utter rubbish. Instead of whinging that FEers dare disagree with you, try to respond to the actual discussion.
This is anotehr crucial problem. You are raised believing that observations and theory may as well be the same thing, that if we see something and RET has an answer, there is no possible way anything else could also explain it.

Quote
This would mean that driving a car, or flying in a plane (which we can demonstably do - there are even FE pilots on here) can no longer be explained by our current mathematical models. If this is the case, then it is demonstrably up to the FE community to propose a new explanation. It's not sufficient to simply call modern science a "cult" or a "conspiracy". If you're right, then simply prove it. I will always listen to alternate theory - it's (ironically for FE) one of the central tenets of science - the offering of a counter theory and a proof by observable calculation. Why, for example, can't a FE (like Mad Mike Hughes in the US), go up to altitude or indeed travel to "underneath" the FE and prove the theory - or indeed conclude they are mistaken? Consider, the physical laws of circular motion, if the flat earth theory is correct, there would be utterly inexplicable problems explaing why someone living in northern Sweden experiences the exact same graviational forces as say, my living in Australia. In a FE theory, I should be being torn apart.... but I'm not. Now a single observation like that proves nothing, but if you apply a particular theory, then it should work for all applications - and our current mathematics, in my opinion, do.
What the actual fuck are you talking about?

Quote
Your point "You are taught what people believe, not how it was developed, not why it is believed..." should surely be challenging the ancient architects of modern day science - because if they were wrong, then everything is wrong.(*)

(*it should be noted that scientific theories are sometimes adapted not because they are necessarily wrong, but are not right in all circumstances - classically Newton's laws of motion at sub-light speed which do not work at speeds approaching light speed (as per Einsteins relativity).
[/b]
Congrats, you just refuted your whole bs line of reasoning.

Quote

So please explain why, having proposed a FE theory, has nobody made any tangible attempts to prove it as opposed to simply refuting the SE model
A) We do.
B) Performed experiments don't cease existing or stop counting as evidence, if another model accounts for them better then it should be preferred.
C) As you pointed out, there is no consensus, what exactly would be the point of doing an experiment that a lot of us wouldn't expect to see anything odd with? I've been pitching an experiment a while, I just lack the resources to do it (and it wouldn't count for anything given anything I provide that dares be contrary to RET would be rejected out of hand), and it wouldn't mean anything to other FEers.

Why so rude? Why so nasty and obnxious? No call for the tone of your reply whatsoever. I presume you read my tags? Disgraceful attitude and reported to mods.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2018, 07:32:11 AM by panicp »
I'm here for a serious discussion to challenge the flat earth myth.
As an evidence-based scientist, many might disagree with me.

That does NOT mean I accept or tolerate abuse, trolling, abruptly ending a conversation because I ask a question you cannot answer and especially the use of pseudo-science, or other non-evidence based data or untestable theories (without at least offering a proposed method of experiment). Clear enough?

*

Offline JRowe

  • *
  • Posts: 585
  • Slowly being driven insane by RE nonsense
    • View Profile
    • Dual Earth Theory
Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #29 on: July 29, 2018, 01:22:24 PM »
Why so rude? Why so nasty and obnxious? No call for the tone of your reply whatsoever. I presume you read my tags? Disgraceful attitude and reported to mods.
Why precisely should I giev any respect to a sanctimonious, patronising, arrogant, dishonest poster?
My DE model explained here.
Open to questions, but if you're curious start there rather than expecting me to explain it all from scratch every time.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9373
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #30 on: July 29, 2018, 05:49:40 PM »
Why precisely should I giev any respect to a sanctimonious, patronising, arrogant, dishonest poster?
Because the rules require you to do so, so long as you're posting in the upper fora, or at least to refrain from personal attacks. Pretty please and thank you.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #31 on: July 31, 2018, 03:17:42 PM »
Why precisely should I giev any respect to a sanctimonious, patronising, arrogant, dishonest poster?
Because the rules require you to do so, so long as you're posting in the upper fora, or at least to refrain from personal attacks. Pretty please and thank you.



I have most certainly not posted anthing deliberately sanctimonious, patronising arrogant and in particular, I find Jrowe calling me dishonest particularly offensive. I accept that I might be wrong about things, but at NO point have I been deliberately dishonest.

And this is exactly why it is so difficult to engage in meaningful discussion here - because after 1 or two posts - that ^ is the supreme judgement and conclusion of someone with whom I was trying to have a serious discussion. Hopefully there will be others who want to actually discuss issues without getting sweary and spitting their dummy.

I appreciate the backup from Mod Pete. Thanks.
I'm here for a serious discussion to challenge the flat earth myth.
As an evidence-based scientist, many might disagree with me.

That does NOT mean I accept or tolerate abuse, trolling, abruptly ending a conversation because I ask a question you cannot answer and especially the use of pseudo-science, or other non-evidence based data or untestable theories (without at least offering a proposed method of experiment). Clear enough?

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #32 on: August 01, 2018, 05:25:01 PM »
@JRowe..... Shhhhhhhhhh.
I'm here for a serious discussion to challenge the flat earth myth.
As an evidence-based scientist, many might disagree with me.

That does NOT mean I accept or tolerate abuse, trolling, abruptly ending a conversation because I ask a question you cannot answer and especially the use of pseudo-science, or other non-evidence based data or untestable theories (without at least offering a proposed method of experiment). Clear enough?

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8555
    • View Profile
Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #33 on: August 01, 2018, 07:47:20 PM »
@JRowe..... Shhhhhhhhhh.

If you have nothing to add to the thread, then don't bother posting. If you need help on how to post in the upper fora, please read the rules. Warned.
Wait, is Thork gay or does he just have a thing for lipstick?

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #34 on: August 03, 2018, 02:38:25 AM »
I literally just had this conversation with a sociologist today. She said it was dangerous. I respectfully disagreed, but I can understand how someone might see it that way. However.....

It is no more harmful than watching television or participating in social media like Facebook. When someone engages in Facebook chatter the motives for doing so are likely self-centered - in fact, people betray themselves by believing in moment-to-moment interactions made of perceived feelings that are often incorrect. People bet their whole lives on these perceived feelings and disown family members and long time friends over a few words that were exchanged without so much as a verbal or face-to-face interaction. Our senses are dulled by digital dialogue made in closed rooms thousands of miles apart.

What is real?

Is open debate about controversial topics more dangerous than the rabbit whole of social distortion? I don't think so.
"noche te ipsum"

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."  - Albert Einstein

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #35 on: August 03, 2018, 12:11:49 PM »
Is open debate about controversial topics more dangerous than the rabbit whole of social distortion? I don't think so.
Ah, but this isn't a controversial topic...
There's the problem. The way you framed it, no it isn't dangerous. But when a non-controversial topic like this is claimed to be controversial then it can be problematic. One (since discredited) paper about vaccinations having a link to autism + a press frenzy about it led to a lot of parents not vaccinating their children and that has had consequences in terms of disease outbreaks. This particular topic is not going to directly lead to such consequences of course but it's the level of thinking it represents which is potentially dangerous.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #36 on: August 03, 2018, 12:44:07 PM »
I don't see that it is dangerous at all.

Being someone who lives life according believing in the round earth theory, I don't see any harm in a community of people trying to prove otherwise.

It doesn't really affect anything in my life, or their own, members of their family etc. if they believe the Earth is flat (for the sake of this point, I am not saying that it is or is not flat), just like it doesn't really affect them if I believe the Earth is round.

When this does become a problem is when you get idiots who seem to think it is right to abuse others, either physically or mentally, because their view of something that is relatively trivial, differs from their own.

(I firmly believe that the stuff I have said above should also adhere to religion, country of birth, colour of skin, age, etc.)

As another user has put, there have been "studies" into other topics, like vaccinations, that were completely untrue but pushed nonetheless. Believing in these is dangerous as these can actually have an affect on a person's health, and worse than that the affect is on someone else's life because they are too young to be able to make their own informed choice.



In a nutshell, no, not dangerous. Even if it turns out that I am wrong and things like GPS and mobile phone satellites are faked and actually work through someway on Earth, then it still does not make a difference to my life. They still work, just not in the way I am told they work

pj1

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #37 on: August 03, 2018, 12:52:16 PM »
Seems pretty dangerous for Mad Mike Hughes and his steam rocket.

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #38 on: August 03, 2018, 02:08:17 PM »
Quote
One (since discredited) paper about vaccinations having a link to autism + a press frenzy about it led to a lot of parents not vaccinating their children and that has had consequences in terms of disease outbreaks.

This is an example of social distortion, which as I said is much more dangerous than debating theory. Scare tactics are used all over media, and is a form of social control.

If you read about a theory and immediately 'drink the cool-aid', that might speak more about an individual having impulse control issues, or a lack of any real foundation.

I am a REer, but as I read more about FET, I have actually learned some things about RE that I never knew. I've considered things about perception and space that I have not considered prior to joining this society.

The best ideas originate by challenging the status quo, or in groups where different ideas are brought to the table. In group-theory, there is a phenomenon called "group think" where a collective decision is made when nobody wants to challenge the leader of the group. Everyone blindly agrees to a policy or decision because they are all afraid to say something different - this is harmful to the group and the individual.

For years and several generations, we have blindly believed in what we were told for no other reason than we were told it. Our global (pardon my biased terminology) community is in dire need of social enlightenment. We are destroying ourselves slowly, but surely, in more ways than one. We will not gain this desperately needed enlightenment if we blindly follow old ideology.
"noche te ipsum"

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."  - Albert Einstein

Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« Reply #39 on: August 03, 2018, 02:09:58 PM »
Seems pretty dangerous for Mad Mike Hughes and his steam rocket.

Perhaps he has impulse control issues?! That was pretty insane! I never heard Mike's conclusion from his flight though... only the video commentators closing statement, "The earth is definitely not flat".
"noche te ipsum"

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."  - Albert Einstein