The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth General => Topic started by: spoon on November 07, 2012, 08:42:50 PM
-
We all know that weathermen aren't always right, but it seems apparent that satellites have played quite an important role in meteorolgy today. I guess I can accept that satellite tv doesn't come from satellites, but I don't think a radio tower could see and accurately predict hurricane Sandy.
-
Seeing a hurricane is not the same as predicting the path. :-\
-
Meteorologists do predict the paths of storms though. Ok, it's not 100% accurate, but it appears that they must have a "bird's eye view" of the situation in order to predict as they do.
-
Weather couldn't be predicted prior to the advent of satellite technology? ???
Even from an RE'er standpoint, your argument doesn't make sense.
-
A storms path is predicted by data collected by aircraft. Measuring relative humidities, temperature and pressures of the areas around the storm allows them to predict the path the storm will take. How could you tell where a hurricane is going to go by taking a look at a picture? ??? Can you tell me which way a ball is going to travel by looking at a picture of it?
Forecasting Hurricane Routes
Once a hurricane has formed, it can be tracked. Scientists can usually predict its path for 3-5 days in advance. A hurricane’s possible trajectory is usually represented as a cone, which shrinks over time as the error in the prediction decreases. To predict the path of these storms, meteorologists can use many different models. The original best model was CLIPER (Climate and Persistence). It is designed as a statistical regression equation based on past data and current climatological data. This was the major forecasting model used up until the 1980’s. Today it is used primarily for testing and comparing new models. NHC90 and BAM (Beta and Advection Model) are two models based on data gathered by planes. They use measurements taken multiple times in a day, and the models themselves are updated every couple of years. The National Hurricane Center relies heavily on two different international forecasting systems, the United Kingdom Meteorological Office’s global model and the United States Navy Operational Global Atmospheric Predictions Systems (NOAA, 2004). There are many more models used. This list includes only several of the major, most common models used to forecast the movement of storm systems.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/F2.html (http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/F2.html)
-
so they use aircraft, but they also claim to use satellites. are all the weather forecasters in on the conspiracy too?
-
so they use aircraft, but they also claim to use satellites. are all the weather forecasters in on the conspiracy too?
They think they use satellites in the same way GPS users think they use satellites.
-
but I don't think a radio tower could see and accurately predict hurricane Sandy.
What do radio towers have to do with it?
-
but I don't think a radio tower could see and accurately predict hurricane Sandy.
What do radio towers have to do with it?
Where do the meteorologists get their signals from, if not satellites?
-
Where do the meteorologists get their signals from, if not satellites?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar)
-
but I don't think a radio tower could see and accurately predict hurricane Sandy.
What do radio towers have to do with it?
Where do the meteorologists get their signals from, if not satellites?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar)
I'd hate to agree with rushy on this one... but I'm going to. You can't really track a storm with a radio tower.
-
the radio tower thing was sarcasm.. but ok, doppler radar makes sense. so are weathermen part of the conspiracy as well?
-
the radio tower thing was sarcasm.. but ok, doppler radar makes sense. so are weathermen part of the conspiracy as well?
What caused you think that?
-
I'm not certain we're on the same page, so before I go on, can we agree that:
A. Meteorologists CLAIM to use satellites to aid in their predictions.
B. they don't actually use satellites, they use Doppler radar to track storms.
C.Doppler radar works this way, essentially: send a signal towards a storm. It will bounce back. Voila, you know where the storm is.
-
I'm not certain we're on the same page, so before I go on, can we agree that:
A. Meteorologists CLAIM to use satellites to aid in their predictions.
GPS users claim to use satellites, that doesn't make them part of the conspiracy.
B. they don't actually use satellites, they use Doppler radar to track storms.
You claimed that one cannot predict weather without satellites, which was shown to be incorrect. Meteorologists receive all of their weather data from NOAA, which collaborates its satellite division with NASA. All of the folks down the chain don't know the satellites aren't real.
C.Doppler radar works this way, essentially: send a signal towards a storm. It will bounce back. Voila, you know where the storm is.
Doppler radars check for a lot more than the location of a storm, that is only the basic images shown to the public because that is all you care to see. I personally don't want to see a bunch of technical garbage when I just want to see if it is going to rain, do you? Meteorologists are not part of any sort of conspiracy.
-
You claimed that one cannot predict weather without satellites
I have been a member of this site for about three days, with about 7 or so hours logged. I enjoy the mental stimulation as well as a good debate. I have learned that FE is a valid theory (with a few stipulations of course) that should at least be glanced at by the general public. I have also acquired information about the physics model I subscribe to. Based on that, I draw the conclusion that time spent here is not time wasted.
However, there is one user in particular who seems to be a combination of every negative aspect on this site all wrapped up into one entity. That user is Irushwithscvs. Examples:
1. Blatant lying, as exemplified in the quote.
2. Relentless opposition to evidence with credible sources (even on topics not critical to proving FE or RE
3. Trolling
4. Ignorance of previous posts in a thread.
5. Irrelevant technical jargon.
6. Resorting to subtle slanderous comments in what was at one point a civilized discussion.
7. Quickly altering his stance without telling you and explaining why, resulting in lots of confusion.
Source: Irushwithscvs post history
... To name but a few. I don't care if this gets thrown into the angry rants section or whatever, at least that means a mod sees what I'm sure at least a small portion of the user base thinks. Honestly, his presence makes my overall experience visiting this site slightly worse every time I'm here. Besides all that, he's just.. Annoying to discuss with. I have a special voice I use in my head for his posts. It's a highly irritating voice.
My request is this. Don't respond to my questions. I'm sure there's an FEer out there who can express your opinions in a much more suitable manner.
Somebody on this site once said to me something along the lines of "he'll drive you crazy over time if you let him.". I thought "No way, it's the Internet lol". I was wrong... And it only took three days. That's gotta be a high score for you or something.
That's all.
-
You claimed that one cannot predict weather without satellites
I have been a member of this site for about three days, with about 7 or so hours logged. I enjoy the mental stimulation as well as a good debate. I have learned that FE is a valid theory (with a few stipulations of course) that should at least be glanced at by the general public. I have also acquired information about the physics model I subscribe to. Based on that, I draw the conclusion that time spent here is not time wasted.
However, there is one user in particular who seems to be a combination of every negative aspect on this site all wrapped up into one entity. That user is Irushwithscvs. Examples:
1. Blatant lying, as exemplified in the quote.
2. Relentless opposition to evidence with credible sources (even on topics not critical to proving FE or RE
3. Trolling
4. Ignorance of previous posts in a thread.
5. Irrelevant technical jargon.
6. Resorting to subtle slanderous comments in what was at one point a civilized discussion.
7. Quickly altering his stance without telling you and explaining why, resulting in lots of confusion.
Source: Irushwithscvs post history
... To name but a few. I don't care if this gets thrown into the angry rants section or whatever, at least that means a mod sees what I'm sure at least a small portion of the user base thinks. Honestly, his presence makes my overall experience visiting this site slightly worse every time I'm here. Besides all that, he's just.. Annoying to discuss with. I have a special voice I use in my head for his posts. It's a highly irritating voice.
My request is this. Don't respond to my questions. I'm sure there's an FEer out there who can express your opinions in a much more suitable manner.
Somebody on this site once said to me something along the lines of "he'll drive you crazy over time if you let him.". I thought "No way, it's the Internet lol". I was wrong... And it only took three days. That's gotta be a high score for you or something.
That's all.
Hey! That was me that said that to you! You should put this in suggestions and concerns. But honestly, if you're not an FEer, the mods will not do anything about it. And even then, the mods have their favorites. This is a highly biased forum and the mods will admit it. Rushy just happens to be one of their favorites.
-
Clear FE victory.
-
This is a highly biased forum and the mods will admit it. Rushy just happens to be one of their favorites.
I'm not sure that's at all true.
Again, satellites/psuedolites take pretty pictures of storms. Hard data is collected in all sorts of ways, most frequently sampling by aircraft. That data is used to predict the storm's path.
-
You claimed that one cannot predict weather without satellites
I have been a member of this site for about three days, with about 7 or so hours logged. I enjoy the mental stimulation as well as a good debate. I have learned that FE is a valid theory (with a few stipulations of course) that should at least be glanced at by the general public. I have also acquired information about the physics model I subscribe to. Based on that, I draw the conclusion that time spent here is not time wasted.
However, there is one user in particular who seems to be a combination of every negative aspect on this site all wrapped up into one entity. That user is Irushwithscvs. Examples:
1. Blatant lying, as exemplified in the quote.
2. Relentless opposition to evidence with credible sources (even on topics not critical to proving FE or RE
3. Trolling
4. Ignorance of previous posts in a thread.
5. Irrelevant technical jargon.
6. Resorting to subtle slanderous comments in what was at one point a civilized discussion.
7. Quickly altering his stance without telling you and explaining why, resulting in lots of confusion.
Source: Irushwithscvs post history
... To name but a few. I don't care if this gets thrown into the angry rants section or whatever, at least that means a mod sees what I'm sure at least a small portion of the user base thinks. Honestly, his presence makes my overall experience visiting this site slightly worse every time I'm here. Besides all that, he's just.. Annoying to discuss with. I have a special voice I use in my head for his posts. It's a highly irritating voice.
My request is this. Don't respond to my questions. I'm sure there's an FEer out there who can express your opinions in a much more suitable manner.
Somebody on this site once said to me something along the lines of "he'll drive you crazy over time if you let him.". I thought "No way, it's the Internet lol". I was wrong... And it only took three days. That's gotta be a high score for you or something.
That's all.
Hey! That was me that said that to you! You should put this in suggestions and concerns. But honestly, if you're not an FEer, the mods will not do anything about it. And even then, the mods have their favorites. This is a highly biased forum and the mods will admit it. Rushy just happens to be one of their favorites.
As a former mod who has no reason to protect them, this is patently incorrect. Certainly we avoid bothering Thork when possible because he makes such a ruckus about it, but in reality it's just a case of wanting to allow free discussion. We don't like to impose restrictions on how you can and can't debate. In fact, not realizing that is pretty much the reason I'm not a mod anymore. So don't accuse them of bias just because they let Rushy be Rushy. Feel free to lodge a complaint, of course, but remember that you are also allowed to argue the way he does if you feel the urge.
-
Feel free to lodge a complaint, of course, but remember that you are also allowed to argue the way he does if you feel the urge.
So the mods also believe that one cannot predict weather without satellites? Why are the mods so illiterate then? It was shown to be incorrect.
-
Feel free to lodge a complaint, of course, but remember that you are also allowed to argue the way he does if you feel the urge.
So the mods also believe that one cannot predict weather without satellites? Why are the mods so illiterate then? It was shown to be incorrect.
He did not say that he agrees with irush, he said that irush and everyone else, including you, are free to argue in any way that you wish to, as long as you stay within the rules of the forum in which you are arguing.
-
Feel free to lodge a complaint, of course, but remember that you are also allowed to argue the way he does if you feel the urge.
So the mods also believe that one cannot predict weather without satellites? Why are the mods so illiterate then? It was shown to be incorrect.
He did not say that he agrees with irush, he said that irush and everyone else, including you, are free to argue in any way that you wish to, as long as you stay within the rules of the forum in which you are arguing.
That was my joke. You cannot argue by simply pretending the other person said something and refuting it as rush did.
-
Feel free to lodge a complaint, of course, but remember that you are also allowed to argue the way he does if you feel the urge.
So the mods also believe that one cannot predict weather without satellites? Why are the mods so illiterate then? It was shown to be incorrect.
He did not say that he agrees with irush, he said that irush and everyone else, including you, are free to argue in any way that you wish to, as long as you stay within the rules of the forum in which you are arguing.
That was my joke. You cannot argue by simply pretending the other person said something and refuting it as rush did.
You might want to work on your deliverance.
-
I thought I made it quite clear, at least, by quoting rush nearly verbatim and blockquoting the ex-mod's relevant line. But oh well.
-
I thought you were retarded at first, but now I see you trying to make a point. However, that point does not prove either side. You could try using proof or something to better your argument. Just my opinion, though.
-
"Proof", "side", "argument"...
It was just a joke. If you don't like it, that's fine.
-
this has strayed a little far from the original topic and is now turning into a lot of civilized debate on what should and shouldn't be allowed
-
Glad you all settled that. What Ive been wondering ever since I first discovered the FE forum is this (& perhaps it is also part of burdenofproofs point/query).
Besides just the meteorologists, how is it that the majority of (mainstream) scientists, dating back hundreds of years, decided/discovered (through much scientific inquiry) that the earth is spherical? Where talking about smart people here. Some beyond smart and some genius!
This is not to say that FE believers do not have intelligent and scientific minds amongst you but the question remains .. how were, and how are, so many people so easily fooled by a RE conspiracy and how could such a wide-spread and long standing conspiracy hold together and prevent mainstream scientists from ever discovering the truth for themselves? Surely someone of note, and the balls to contradict such a widely held belief as a spherical earth, would have seen that its all wrong and stood up to say something by now? To me it sounds as if this conspiracy must be far greater and more devious than any other believed to exist.
I understand that your everyday man might not feel the need to question the nature of the world around them, but there are so many people who dedicate their entire lives to discovering the "truth" through hard science, through specific branches of science like meteorology and many others that are all interlinked by logic and reason as well as straight-forward observation.
It seems to me that to entirely dismiss the notion of a spherical earth and the forces that act within and around it (such as gravitation), is to also dismiss a very large section of the other areas of science as well. I respect FE theorists for the effort though.
-
Glad you all settled that. What Ive been wondering ever since I first discovered the FE forum is this (& perhaps it is also part of burdenofproofs point/query).
Besides just the meteorologists, how is it that the majority of (mainstream) scientists, dating back hundreds of years, decided/discovered (through much scientific inquiry) that the earth is spherical? Where talking about smart people here. Some beyond smart and some genius!
This is not to say that FE believers do not have intelligent and scientific minds amongst you but the question remains .. how were, and how are, so many people so easily fooled by a RE conspiracy and how could such a wide-spread and long standing conspiracy hold together and prevent mainstream scientists from ever discovering the truth for themselves? Surely someone of note, and the balls to contradict such a widely held belief as a spherical earth, would have seen that its all wrong and stood up to say something by now? To me it sounds as if this conspiracy must be far greater and more devious than any other believed to exist.
I understand that your everyday man might not feel the need to question the nature of the world around them, but there are so many people who dedicate their entire lives to discovering the "truth" through hard science, through specific branches of science like meteorology and many others that are all interlinked by logic and reason as well as straight-forward observation.
It seems to me that to entirely dismiss the notion of a spherical earth and the forces that act within and around it (such as gravitation), is to also dismiss a very large section of the other areas of science as well. I respect FE theorists for the effort though.
You are asking how brainwashing works. I suppose to find the answer, you only need to study religion. When you have been told something enough times, you actually start to believe it.
-
Glad you all settled that. What Ive been wondering ever since I first discovered the FE forum is this (& perhaps it is also part of burdenofproofs point/query).
Besides just the meteorologists, how is it that the majority of (mainstream) scientists, dating back hundreds of years, decided/discovered (through much scientific inquiry) that the earth is spherical? Where talking about smart people here. Some beyond smart and some genius!
This is not to say that FE believers do not have intelligent and scientific minds amongst you but the question remains .. how were, and how are, so many people so easily fooled by a RE conspiracy and how could such a wide-spread and long standing conspiracy hold together and prevent mainstream scientists from ever discovering the truth for themselves? Surely someone of note, and the balls to contradict such a widely held belief as a spherical earth, would have seen that its all wrong and stood up to say something by now? To me it sounds as if this conspiracy must be far greater and more devious than any other believed to exist.
I understand that your everyday man might not feel the need to question the nature of the world around them, but there are so many people who dedicate their entire lives to discovering the "truth" through hard science, through specific branches of science like meteorology and many others that are all interlinked by logic and reason as well as straight-forward observation.
It seems to me that to entirely dismiss the notion of a spherical earth and the forces that act within and around it (such as gravitation), is to also dismiss a very large section of the other areas of science as well. I respect FE theorists for the effort though.
You are asking how brainwashing works. I suppose to find the answer, you only need to study religion. When you have been told something enough times, you actually start to believe it.
You can't draw an analogy between religion and this conspiracy. Religion is it's own special conspiracy. It is unique because it can't be 100% disproven beyond all doubt through means of observation, and that the risks involved with your belief in the conspiracy are so great. For instance, it is incredibly easy to "scare" somebody into religion but nobody is trying to scare anybody into this conspiracy.
-
Glad you all settled that. What Ive been wondering ever since I first discovered the FE forum is this (& perhaps it is also part of burdenofproofs point/query).
Besides just the meteorologists, how is it that the majority of (mainstream) scientists, dating back hundreds of years, decided/discovered (through much scientific inquiry) that the earth is spherical? Where talking about smart people here. Some beyond smart and some genius!
This is not to say that FE believers do not have intelligent and scientific minds amongst you but the question remains .. how were, and how are, so many people so easily fooled by a RE conspiracy and how could such a wide-spread and long standing conspiracy hold together and prevent mainstream scientists from ever discovering the truth for themselves? Surely someone of note, and the balls to contradict such a widely held belief as a spherical earth, would have seen that its all wrong and stood up to say something by now? To me it sounds as if this conspiracy must be far greater and more devious than any other believed to exist.
I understand that your everyday man might not feel the need to question the nature of the world around them, but there are so many people who dedicate their entire lives to discovering the "truth" through hard science, through specific branches of science like meteorology and many others that are all interlinked by logic and reason as well as straight-forward observation.
It seems to me that to entirely dismiss the notion of a spherical earth and the forces that act within and around it (such as gravitation), is to also dismiss a very large section of the other areas of science as well. I respect FE theorists for the effort though.
You are asking how brainwashing works. I suppose to find the answer, you only need to study religion. When you have been told something enough times, you actually start to believe it.
You can't draw an analogy between religion and this conspiracy. Religion is it's own special conspiracy. It is unique because it can't be 100% disproven beyond all doubt through means of observation, and that the risks involved with your belief in the conspiracy are so great. For instance, it is incredibly easy to "scare" somebody into religion but nobody is trying to scare anybody into this conspiracy.
Your analogy is completely flawed. People are not generally scared into religion. They are taught from an early age the origin of the world, life, and the afterlife. People start to believe it after a while.
The same is true about the conspiracy. You are taught from an early age the origin of the universe, the shape of the world, and a magical force called gravity. After a while, you just accept that it is true and stop questioning these topics.
-
Glad you all settled that. What Ive been wondering ever since I first discovered the FE forum is this (& perhaps it is also part of burdenofproofs point/query).
Besides just the meteorologists, how is it that the majority of (mainstream) scientists, dating back hundreds of years, decided/discovered (through much scientific inquiry) that the earth is spherical? Where talking about smart people here. Some beyond smart and some genius!
This is not to say that FE believers do not have intelligent and scientific minds amongst you but the question remains .. how were, and how are, so many people so easily fooled by a RE conspiracy and how could such a wide-spread and long standing conspiracy hold together and prevent mainstream scientists from ever discovering the truth for themselves? Surely someone of note, and the balls to contradict such a widely held belief as a spherical earth, would have seen that its all wrong and stood up to say something by now? To me it sounds as if this conspiracy must be far greater and more devious than any other believed to exist.
I understand that your everyday man might not feel the need to question the nature of the world around them, but there are so many people who dedicate their entire lives to discovering the "truth" through hard science, through specific branches of science like meteorology and many others that are all interlinked by logic and reason as well as straight-forward observation.
It seems to me that to entirely dismiss the notion of a spherical earth and the forces that act within and around it (such as gravitation), is to also dismiss a very large section of the other areas of science as well. I respect FE theorists for the effort though.
You are asking how brainwashing works. I suppose to find the answer, you only need to study religion. When you have been told something enough times, you actually start to believe it.
You can't draw an analogy between religion and this conspiracy. Religion is it's own special conspiracy. It is unique because it can't be 100% disproven beyond all doubt through means of observation, and that the risks involved with your belief in the conspiracy are so great. For instance, it is incredibly easy to "scare" somebody into religion but nobody is trying to scare anybody into this conspiracy.
Your analogy is completely flawed. People are not generally scared into religion. They are taught from an early age the origin of the world, life, and the afterlife. People start to believe it after a while.
The same is true about the conspiracy. You are taught from an early age the origin of the universe, the shape of the world, and a magical force called gravity. After a while, you just accept that it is true and stop questioning these topics.
I never made an analogy. I simply stated why I thought yours was flawed. But ok, I can see how the whole childhood indoctrination thing is relevant in both cases. But the motives in the indoctrination are completely different. At what point in the RE conspiracy do your parents say "If you don't believe the earth is round you'll burn forever in hell."?
-
Glad you all settled that. What Ive been wondering ever since I first discovered the FE forum is this (& perhaps it is also part of burdenofproofs point/query).
Besides just the meteorologists, how is it that the majority of (mainstream) scientists, dating back hundreds of years, decided/discovered (through much scientific inquiry) that the earth is spherical? Where talking about smart people here. Some beyond smart and some genius!
This is not to say that FE believers do not have intelligent and scientific minds amongst you but the question remains .. how were, and how are, so many people so easily fooled by a RE conspiracy and how could such a wide-spread and long standing conspiracy hold together and prevent mainstream scientists from ever discovering the truth for themselves? Surely someone of note, and the balls to contradict such a widely held belief as a spherical earth, would have seen that its all wrong and stood up to say something by now? To me it sounds as if this conspiracy must be far greater and more devious than any other believed to exist.
I understand that your everyday man might not feel the need to question the nature of the world around them, but there are so many people who dedicate their entire lives to discovering the "truth" through hard science, through specific branches of science like meteorology and many others that are all interlinked by logic and reason as well as straight-forward observation.
It seems to me that to entirely dismiss the notion of a spherical earth and the forces that act within and around it (such as gravitation), is to also dismiss a very large section of the other areas of science as well. I respect FE theorists for the effort though.
You are asking how brainwashing works. I suppose to find the answer, you only need to study religion. When you have been told something enough times, you actually start to believe it.
You can't draw an analogy between religion and this conspiracy. Religion is it's own special conspiracy. It is unique because it can't be 100% disproven beyond all doubt through means of observation, and that the risks involved with your belief in the conspiracy are so great. For instance, it is incredibly easy to "scare" somebody into religion but nobody is trying to scare anybody into this conspiracy.
Your analogy is completely flawed. People are not generally scared into religion. They are taught from an early age the origin of the world, life, and the afterlife. People start to believe it after a while.
The same is true about the conspiracy. You are taught from an early age the origin of the universe, the shape of the world, and a magical force called gravity. After a while, you just accept that it is true and stop questioning these topics.
I never made an analogy. I simply stated why I thought yours was flawed. But ok, I can see how the whole childhood indoctrination thing is relevant in both cases. But the motives in the indoctrination are completely different. At what point in the RE conspiracy do your parents say "If you don't believe the earth is round you'll burn forever in hell."?
Again, you don't have to be scared or threatened to believe something. You are trying to say that religion controls people by threatening their immortal souls to punishment for eternity. Yes, some religions do that, but not all.
I knew some people who were very racist back when I lived in Alabama. Their parents were racist. Their grandparents were racist. They grew up hearing about inferior races their whole lives. They also thought the Earth was round.
-
Glad you all settled that. What Ive been wondering ever since I first discovered the FE forum is this (& perhaps it is also part of burdenofproofs point/query).
Besides just the meteorologists, how is it that the majority of (mainstream) scientists, dating back hundreds of years, decided/discovered (through much scientific inquiry) that the earth is spherical? Where talking about smart people here. Some beyond smart and some genius!
This is not to say that FE believers do not have intelligent and scientific minds amongst you but the question remains .. how were, and how are, so many people so easily fooled by a RE conspiracy and how could such a wide-spread and long standing conspiracy hold together and prevent mainstream scientists from ever discovering the truth for themselves? Surely someone of note, and the balls to contradict such a widely held belief as a spherical earth, would have seen that its all wrong and stood up to say something by now? To me it sounds as if this conspiracy must be far greater and more devious than any other believed to exist.
I understand that your everyday man might not feel the need to question the nature of the world around them, but there are so many people who dedicate their entire lives to discovering the "truth" through hard science, through specific branches of science like meteorology and many others that are all interlinked by logic and reason as well as straight-forward observation.
It seems to me that to entirely dismiss the notion of a spherical earth and the forces that act within and around it (such as gravitation), is to also dismiss a very large section of the other areas of science as well. I respect FE theorists for the effort though.
You are asking how brainwashing works. I suppose to find the answer, you only need to study religion. When you have been told something enough times, you actually start to believe it.
You can't draw an analogy between religion and this conspiracy. Religion is it's own special conspiracy. It is unique because it can't be 100% disproven beyond all doubt through means of observation, and that the risks involved with your belief in the conspiracy are so great. For instance, it is incredibly easy to "scare" somebody into religion but nobody is trying to scare anybody into this conspiracy.
Your analogy is completely flawed. People are not generally scared into religion. They are taught from an early age the origin of the world, life, and the afterlife. People start to believe it after a while.
The same is true about the conspiracy. You are taught from an early age the origin of the universe, the shape of the world, and a magical force called gravity. After a while, you just accept that it is true and stop questioning these topics.
I never made an analogy. I simply stated why I thought yours was flawed. But ok, I can see how the whole childhood indoctrination thing is relevant in both cases. But the motives in the indoctrination are completely different. At what point in the RE conspiracy do your parents say "If you don't believe the earth is round you'll burn forever in hell."?
Again, you don't have to be scared or threatened to believe something. You are trying to say that religion controls people by threatening their immortal souls to punishment for eternity. Yes, some religions do that, but not all.
I knew some people who were very racist back when I lived in Alabama. Their parents were racist. Their grandparents were racist. They grew up hearing about inferior races their whole lives. They also thought the Earth was round.
I still believe these two "conspiracies" are fundamentally different. One ultimately can be proven/disproven whilst the other can't. But I will concede that you are right about the whole indoctrination process. For me personally, if nobody had ever claimed to achieve space flight, I might be on the fence in regards to what I thought earth's shape was. I guess I have too much faith in human honesty/integrity, or maybe you have too little.
-
Glad you all settled that. What Ive been wondering ever since I first discovered the FE forum is this (& perhaps it is also part of burdenofproofs point/query).
Besides just the meteorologists, how is it that the majority of (mainstream) scientists, dating back hundreds of years, decided/discovered (through much scientific inquiry) that the earth is spherical? Where talking about smart people here. Some beyond smart and some genius!
This is not to say that FE believers do not have intelligent and scientific minds amongst you but the question remains .. how were, and how are, so many people so easily fooled by a RE conspiracy and how could such a wide-spread and long standing conspiracy hold together and prevent mainstream scientists from ever discovering the truth for themselves? Surely someone of note, and the balls to contradict such a widely held belief as a spherical earth, would have seen that its all wrong and stood up to say something by now? To me it sounds as if this conspiracy must be far greater and more devious than any other believed to exist.
I understand that your everyday man might not feel the need to question the nature of the world around them, but there are so many people who dedicate their entire lives to discovering the "truth" through hard science, through specific branches of science like meteorology and many others that are all interlinked by logic and reason as well as straight-forward observation.
It seems to me that to entirely dismiss the notion of a spherical earth and the forces that act within and around it (such as gravitation), is to also dismiss a very large section of the other areas of science as well. I respect FE theorists for the effort though.
You are asking how brainwashing works. I suppose to find the answer, you only need to study religion. When you have been told something enough times, you actually start to believe it.
You can't draw an analogy between religion and this conspiracy. Religion is it's own special conspiracy. It is unique because it can't be 100% disproven beyond all doubt through means of observation, and that the risks involved with your belief in the conspiracy are so great. For instance, it is incredibly easy to "scare" somebody into religion but nobody is trying to scare anybody into this conspiracy.
Your analogy is completely flawed. People are not generally scared into religion. They are taught from an early age the origin of the world, life, and the afterlife. People start to believe it after a while.
The same is true about the conspiracy. You are taught from an early age the origin of the universe, the shape of the world, and a magical force called gravity. After a while, you just accept that it is true and stop questioning these topics.
I never made an analogy. I simply stated why I thought yours was flawed. But ok, I can see how the whole childhood indoctrination thing is relevant in both cases. But the motives in the indoctrination are completely different. At what point in the RE conspiracy do your parents say "If you don't believe the earth is round you'll burn forever in hell."?
Again, you don't have to be scared or threatened to believe something. You are trying to say that religion controls people by threatening their immortal souls to punishment for eternity. Yes, some religions do that, but not all.
I knew some people who were very racist back when I lived in Alabama. Their parents were racist. Their grandparents were racist. They grew up hearing about inferior races their whole lives. They also thought the Earth was round.
I still believe these two "conspiracies" are fundamentally different. One ultimately can be proven/disproven whilst the other can't. But I will concede that you are right about the whole indoctrination process. For me personally, if nobody had ever claimed to achieve space flight, I might be on the fence in regards to what I thought earth's shape was. I guess I have too much faith in human honesty/integrity, or maybe you have too little.
Let me ask you a serious question. On a scale of 0 to 100%, what percentage of the information you are presented with by the government would you say is completely honest?
-
50%. But i believe the lies they tell are little white lies that they think they can get away with.
-
I would have said around %50 percent as well. Just enough to be credible, but still be able to control your thinking.
-
It seems to me that religion has a definite and evident purpose. Racism also has a fairly definite and evident cause. What is the purpose of the RE conspiracy? Why would NASA spend so much money and resources firing rockets into space? What would be the great harm in letting people know the truth?
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
Beyond decieving the public, what "control" do they have?
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
Beyond decieving the public, what "control" do they have?
Control over money, governments, social thinking, the distribution of power and wealth... actually, it sounds pretty good.
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
Beyond decieving the public, what "control" do they have?
Control over money, governments, social thinking, the distribution of power and wealth... actually, it sounds pretty good.
The heads of the conspiracy would have more money than they need, even without the conspiracy. They are leaders of NASA, money isn't an issue. Social thinking is just deception, so that's not really anything. You may have to elaborate on the distribution, and how that would benefit them as individuals, seeing as the number of conspirators is small. I can see how controlling the government would benefit them, if you are implying they can pull funds for their "space adventures". But then again, they would be rich in the first place, so what's the point?
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
Beyond decieving the public, what "control" do they have?
Control over money, governments, social thinking, the distribution of power and wealth... actually, it sounds pretty good.
The heads of the conspiracy would have more money than they need, even without the conspiracy. They are leaders of NASA, money isn't an issue. Social thinking is just deception, so that's not really anything. You may have to elaborate on the distribution, and how that would benefit them as individuals, seeing as the number of conspirators is small. I can see how controlling the government would benefit them, if you are implying they can pull funds for their "space adventures". But then again, they would be rich in the first place, so what's the point?
More money means more means to complete their agenda. Controlling the masses gives them power and allows them to lead the people in which ever direction they want. Distribution means that they are buying allies. Funding "space expeditions" gives them a way of accomplishing all of the above.
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
Beyond decieving the public, what "control" do they have?
Control over money, governments, social thinking, the distribution of power and wealth... actually, it sounds pretty good.
The heads of the conspiracy would have more money than they need, even without the conspiracy. They are leaders of NASA, money isn't an issue. Social thinking is just deception, so that's not really anything. You may have to elaborate on the distribution, and how that would benefit them as individuals, seeing as the number of conspirators is small. I can see how controlling the government would benefit them, if you are implying they can pull funds for their "space adventures". But then again, they would be rich in the first place, so what's the point?
More money means more means to complete their agenda. Controlling the masses gives them power and allows them to lead the people in which ever direction they want. Distribution means that they are buying allies. Funding "space expeditions" gives them a way of accomplishing all of the above.
So basically, a small group of people dictate the earth? I could be wrong, it just doesn't seem probable that they could get away with it for so long. It seems pessimistic if that's what you base your beliefs on, seeing as there's no tangible evidence for the conspiracy other than "the earth is flat, therefore NASA is a conspiracy."
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
Beyond decieving the public, what "control" do they have?
Control over money, governments, social thinking, the distribution of power and wealth... actually, it sounds pretty good.
The heads of the conspiracy would have more money than they need, even without the conspiracy. They are leaders of NASA, money isn't an issue. Social thinking is just deception, so that's not really anything. You may have to elaborate on the distribution, and how that would benefit them as individuals, seeing as the number of conspirators is small. I can see how controlling the government would benefit them, if you are implying they can pull funds for their "space adventures". But then again, they would be rich in the first place, so what's the point?
More money means more means to complete their agenda. Controlling the masses gives them power and allows them to lead the people in which ever direction they want. Distribution means that they are buying allies. Funding "space expeditions" gives them a way of accomplishing all of the above.
So basically, a small group of people dictate the earth? I could be wrong, it just doesn't seem probable that they could get away with it for so long. It seems pessimistic if that's what you base your beliefs on, seeing as there's no tangible evidence for the conspiracy other than "the earth is flat, therefore NASA is a conspiracy."
Yes, a small group of people dictate the Earth. Why does that seem improbable? Gangsters have ruled towns before. They were only brought down by an entity more powerful than themselves. Who is more powerful than the conspiracy?
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
Beyond decieving the public, what "control" do they have?
Control over money, governments, social thinking, the distribution of power and wealth... actually, it sounds pretty good.
The heads of the conspiracy would have more money than they need, even without the conspiracy. They are leaders of NASA, money isn't an issue. Social thinking is just deception, so that's not really anything. You may have to elaborate on the distribution, and how that would benefit them as individuals, seeing as the number of conspirators is small. I can see how controlling the government would benefit them, if you are implying they can pull funds for their "space adventures". But then again, they would be rich in the first place, so what's the point?
More money means more means to complete their agenda. Controlling the masses gives them power and allows them to lead the people in which ever direction they want. Distribution means that they are buying allies. Funding "space expeditions" gives them a way of accomplishing all of the above.
So basically, a small group of people dictate the earth? I could be wrong, it just doesn't seem probable that they could get away with it for so long. It seems pessimistic if that's what you base your beliefs on, seeing as there's no tangible evidence for the conspiracy other than "the earth is flat, therefore NASA is a conspiracy."
Yes, a small group of people dictate the Earth. Why does that seem improbable? Gangsters have ruled towns before. They were only brought down by an entity more powerful than themselves. Who is more powerful than the conspiracy?
Don't you have guns? The people are more powerful. Don't be such a wuss.
Also, if they were brainwashing people to go what ever direction they wanted, wouldn't they be brainwashing them to give more money to the space program so that the people in charge could get more money? I mean, most people nowadays would rather watch honey boo-boo and jersey shore than a SLS rocket go up to bring cargo to the moon, or a Skylon launch to bring cargo to the ISS. The top thing searched on the internet this past year has been pron. Does the conspiracy own the entire pron industry as well?
-
For what is worth, I was not taught religion as a child. I have come to see God as God after living a futile life, and turned to Him after many years of self will. Jroa is right, the few(conspiracy) control the masses.
-
the conspiracy.
apart from saying "there must be a conspiracy", was there ever even a hint it actually exists?
-
the conspiracy.
apart from saying "there must be a conspiracy", was there ever even a hint it actually exists?
The terrorists are the hint. As well as Jesus.
-
you alll need to be a bit more precise
-
you alll need to be a bit more precise
Al Qaeida. And Jesus Christ.
-
How is it possible that very few people know that the earth is flat and space travel is a lie while there are millions of people over the world working based on that? They would at least know they are being lied to, don't you think someone would asked himself why is he being paid to be sitting in front of a computer that doesn't really do anything when sending stuff to the space is supposed to be a lot of very hard work?
-
you alll need to be a bit more precise
Al Qaeida. And Jesus Christ.
Now, let's try it again. This time, in context.
-
you alll need to be a bit more precise
Al Qaeida. And Jesus Christ.
Now, let's try it again. This time, in context.
Al Qaeida forced Jesus Christ to convince the Americans and Russians to fake a space program and start the conspiracy to hide the shape of the earth. The heads of NASA are also the heads of Al Qaeida and they all use their money to force people to love Jesus Christ so that they have a reason to commit Jihad on the world and do what the Koran says and kill the infidels. Of course, this suggests and even larger conspiracy. But we wont go in to that.
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
Beyond decieving the public, what "control" do they have?
Control over money, governments, social thinking, the distribution of power and wealth... actually, it sounds pretty good.
The heads of the conspiracy would have more money than they need, even without the conspiracy. They are leaders of NASA, money isn't an issue. Social thinking is just deception, so that's not really anything. You may have to elaborate on the distribution, and how that would benefit them as individuals, seeing as the number of conspirators is small. I can see how controlling the government would benefit them, if you are implying they can pull funds for their "space adventures". But then again, they would be rich in the first place, so what's the point?
More money means more means to complete their agenda. Controlling the masses gives them power and allows them to lead the people in which ever direction they want. Distribution means that they are buying allies. Funding "space expeditions" gives them a way of accomplishing all of the above.
So basically, a small group of people dictate the earth? I could be wrong, it just doesn't seem probable that they could get away with it for so long. It seems pessimistic if that's what you base your beliefs on, seeing as there's no tangible evidence for the conspiracy other than "the earth is flat, therefore NASA is a conspiracy."
Yes, a small group of people dictate the Earth. Why does that seem improbable? Gangsters have ruled towns before. They were only brought down by an entity more powerful than themselves. Who is more powerful than the conspiracy?
Don't you have guns? The people are more powerful. Don't be such a wuss.
Also, if they were brainwashing people to go what ever direction they wanted, wouldn't they be brainwashing them to give more money to the space program so that the people in charge could get more money? I mean, most people nowadays would rather watch honey boo-boo and jersey shore than a SLS rocket go up to bring cargo to the moon, or a Skylon launch to bring cargo to the ISS. The top thing searched on the internet this past year has been pron. Does the conspiracy own the entire pron industry as well?
The conspiracy could very well be in the pron business, but I have no knowledge of this and would only be speculating if I gave you an answer.
As for brainwashing, you don't seem to understand what brainwashing is. The conspiracy is not hypnotizing people. They could not make people want to give them their money. They are feeding people misinformation in order to advance their agenda and funneling money from the space agencies. They are not making people think they are chickens like a sideshow.
-
My personal answer is that the purpose of the conspiracy is so that a hand full of people can control the world.
Beyond decieving the public, what "control" do they have?
Control over money, governments, social thinking, the distribution of power and wealth... actually, it sounds pretty good.
The heads of the conspiracy would have more money than they need, even without the conspiracy. They are leaders of NASA, money isn't an issue. Social thinking is just deception, so that's not really anything. You may have to elaborate on the distribution, and how that would benefit them as individuals, seeing as the number of conspirators is small. I can see how controlling the government would benefit them, if you are implying they can pull funds for their "space adventures". But then again, they would be rich in the first place, so what's the point?
More money means more means to complete their agenda. Controlling the masses gives them power and allows them to lead the people in which ever direction they want. Distribution means that they are buying allies. Funding "space expeditions" gives them a way of accomplishing all of the above.
So basically, a small group of people dictate the earth? I could be wrong, it just doesn't seem probable that they could get away with it for so long. It seems pessimistic if that's what you base your beliefs on, seeing as there's no tangible evidence for the conspiracy other than "the earth is flat, therefore NASA is a conspiracy."
Yes, a small group of people dictate the Earth. Why does that seem improbable? Gangsters have ruled towns before. They were only brought down by an entity more powerful than themselves. Who is more powerful than the conspiracy?
Don't you have guns? The people are more powerful. Don't be such a wuss.
Also, if they were brainwashing people to go what ever direction they wanted, wouldn't they be brainwashing them to give more money to the space program so that the people in charge could get more money? I mean, most people nowadays would rather watch honey boo-boo and jersey shore than a SLS rocket go up to bring cargo to the moon, or a Skylon launch to bring cargo to the ISS. The top thing searched on the internet this past year has been pron. Does the conspiracy own the entire pron industry as well?
The conspiracy could very well be in the pron business, but I have no knowledge of this and would only be speculating if I gave you an answer.
As for brainwashing, you don't seem to understand what brainwashing is. The conspiracy is not hypnotizing people. They could not make people want to give them their money. They are feeding people misinformation in order to advance their agenda and funneling money from the space agencies. They are not making people think they are chickens like a sideshow.
No, I understand brainwashing. What I'm trying to say is that if they were doing it well, they'd be making enough money to send manned missions, not cheap robotic missions.
-
No, I understand brainwashing. What I'm trying to say is that if they were doing it well, they'd be making enough money to send manned missions, not cheap robotic missions.
They don't do any missions, they're fake.