government conspiracy

Quote from: rabinoz on December 10, 2016, 02:00:06 AM

Quote from: jroa on December 09, 2016, 06:54:16 PM

Aristotle also claimed that maggots spontaneously grew from rotting meat.  He kind of lost his street credibility there.

Yes, a lot more is known about the natural world now, but to judge Aristotle or any of the old philosophers, astronomers and scientists by modern standards is simply ridiculous. So, no I doubt he "lost his street credibility".

What I find more amazing is there are people today, with the knowledge we have of the dimensions of the the earth, that can deny all that and think that the earth is flat.

Then, why did you use Aristotle and the other ancient philosophers as an appeal to authority about the shape of the Earth? 

I'm not "appealing to authority", just giving a hitorical perspective on the belief in the Globe. We need no "appeal to authority", just the evidence that has been accumulated over more that two millennia.

What's your authority  , Samuel Birley Rowbotham?   

Quote from: jroa on December 11, 2016, 12:40:37 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on December 10, 2016, 02:00:06 AM

Quote from: jroa on December 09, 2016, 06:54:16 PM

Aristotle also claimed that maggots spontaneously grew from rotting meat.  He kind of lost his street credibility there.

Yes, a lot more is known about the natural world now, but to judge Aristotle or any of the old philosophers, astronomers and scientists by modern standards is simply ridiculous. So, no I doubt he "lost his street credibility".

What I find more amazing is there are people today, with the knowledge we have of the dimensions of the the earth, that can deny all that and think that the earth is flat.

Then, why did you use Aristotle and the other ancient philosophers as an appeal to authority about the shape of the Earth? 

I'm not "appealing to authority", just giving a hitorical perspective on the belief in the Globe. We need no "appeal to authority", just the evidence that has been accumulated over more that two millennia.

What's your authority  , Samuel Birley Rowbotham?   

I gave a historical story as well.  The man believed in a lot of crazy ideas; the round Earth being only one of them. 

I gave a historical story as well.  The man believed in a lot of crazy ideas; the round Earth being only one of them.

Aristotle, Pythagoras, Euclid, Erostothanes, Ptolemy and even old Plato were men of their time and had no more accumulated knowledge than was available at the time.

As far as I know they all believed that the earth was a Globe, some for more sound reasons than others.
Plato for example thought that the earth was a Globe because round was "cool" - using a "technical term" term,
and for that matter, Copernicus justified the perfectly circular orbits of the planets of the basis that the "circle was a perfect shape".

Is is quite hypercritical of us in this age to judge the beliefs of those who do not have our background.

Aristotle was one of the earliest to believe that "everything had a cause", and that might have been part of his reason for "imagining" causes that were incorrect. But before his time (and for many, much after) the common idea was often that one of their many "gods" was the direct cause of so many unexplained events.

So you claim "The man believed in a lot of crazy ideas; the round Earth being only one of them" treats Aristotle quite unjustly.
Many of his beliefs were replaced by more sound reasons, his Globe earth has "stood the test of time".

Just as Galileo had many ideas that we might consider "crazy" (bit strong a word), but much of his word has likewise "stood the test of time".

So, I guess time will tell on your flat earth ideas. I and most others consider them crazy now, but who knows, time might prove you right?

I am removing your double post, because maggots can only spontaneously generate one tkime, lol. 

I like how rab completely ignored my challenge. He always says flat earthers just ignore proof against flat earth... So he does the same thing when theres evidence against a globular one. Ill ask again... How can gravity come into existence before light or matter? No answer? That's ok... Its just because the answer is earth is flat and gravity is not what they say.

I like how rab completely ignored my challenge. He always says flat earthers just ignore proof against flat earth... So he does the same thing when theres evidence against a globular one. Ill ask again... How can gravity come into existence before light or matter? No answer? That's ok... Its just because the answer is earth is flat and gravity is not what they say.

Are you saying that the government is behind gravity?  Or are you just not on topic? 

If the answer to the first question is yes: state this clearly to avoid confusion pls.
If the answer to the second question is yes:  Make your own gd damn thread about it.  Is it so difficult to stay on-topic??

EDIT: Also this is the Q&A section not the debate section.

Wtf is your problem. Read the last few posts and tell me they are 100% on topic. You're only singling me out because you don't like what I have to say. I've responded to the topic previously and am now conducting a discussion from the resulting proponents that have surfaced hitherto.

Wtf is your problem. Read the last few posts and tell me they are 100% on topic. You're only singling me out because you don't like what I have to say. I've responded to the topic previously and am now conducting a discussion from the resulting proponents that have surfaced hitherto.

I wouldn't know if they are on topic, i simply browsed through they quickly.  Yes i should have read them completely.  However, i have a life outside of this forum as well, meaning i don't always have the time to read everything.  (It always is my intention to read each and every reply, i just can't sometimes)

Now if the previous are off-topic they shouldn't be here as well, however why should people be allowed to keep posting off-topic replies just because someone somewhere did? 
And i'm not slinging you specifically out, i can't.  I'm trying to keep this thread on-topic and you happend to be the one that posted last before i answered.
And if you really think you're onto something, there is a quote option and there is a FE discussion subsection on this forum.

I like how rab completely ignored my challenge. He always says flat earthers just ignore proof against flat earth... So he does the same thing when theres evidence against a globular one. Ill ask again... How can gravity come into existence before light or matter? No answer? That's ok... Its just because the answer is earth is flat and gravity is not what they say.

How many flat earths? How many models of the solar system have there been in the recent past. Remeber Pluto? You are holding flat earth to an unfair standard and expect everything to be explained instantly. All models of the universe in the past have become jokes to me. Look at this link below, gravity began before there was even matter or light and this is currently accepted science?? What a joke! lol

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Solar_System_formation_and_evolution_hypotheses

• I answered most of what you wrote in fair detail,
• then stated that the "History of Solar System Formation and Evolution Hypotheses" has nothing to do with "How many models of the solar system have there been in the recent past". Conjecture about origins has nothing to do with the model we now have.

I guess I should have written, "ancient conjecture about origins has nothing to do with the model we now have",
so I don't see why I should waste time about what may or may not have happened an indeterminate time ago.

But you'll need to explain this bit in more detail to me
"So he does the same thing when theres evidence against a globular one. Ill ask again... How can gravity come into existence before light or matter?"

• Where does it claim that?
• How is it relevant to what we have here?
• Why is that evidence against the globe, here and now?

Finally, what I say is of no import anyway.
I could claim that the moon's illumination comes fro "moonshramp" and it would not change the facts one iota.

You seem to have no explanation for what we have here and now, and that is what I consider the issue.

Well to not piss of a certain real human being:

This isn't really on topic now is it?

• I answered most of what you wrote in fair detail,
• then stated that the "History of Solar System Formation and Evolution Hypotheses" has nothing to do with "How many models of the solar system have there been in the recent past". Conjecture about origins has nothing to do with the model we now have.

I guess I should have written, "ancient conjecture about origins has nothing to do with the model we now have",
so I don't see why I should waste time about what may or may not have happened an indeterminate time ago.

But you'll need to explain this bit in more detail to me
"So he does the same thing when theres evidence against a globular one. Ill ask again... How can gravity come into existence before light or matter?"

• Where does it claim that?
• How is it relevant to what we have here?
• Why is that evidence against the globe, here and now?

Finally, what I say is of no import anyway.
I could claim that the moon's illumination comes fro "moonshramp" and it would not change the facts one iota.

You seem to have no explanation for what we have here and now, and that is what I consider the issue.

So could you 2 make your own thread in the discussion board and refrain yourselves from posting anything but an answer to the questions: which government supposedly started the conspiracy of a round earth and when?  (And all DIRECTLY related stuff is welcome as well.)

Well to not piss of a certain real human being:

So could you 2 make your own thread in the discussion board and refrain yourselves from posting anything but an answer to the questions: which government supposedly started the conspiracy of a round earth and when?  (And all DIRECTLY related stuff is welcome as well.)

I thought cats were good doing that anywhere and everywhere.

I'll have to 'fess up and admit I probably started the rot with my reaction to being called a "dummy"

Quote from: Arealhumanbeing on December 08, 2016, 09:14:46 PM

The illuminati are a part of the freemasons, dummy. They are the elite. As the saying goes history is written by the victors, maybe Eratosthenes and Pythagerous  were really saying different things other  than what we are led to believe.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
And you have some basis for your pure guess that "Eratosthenes and Pythagoras were really saying different things"? Dream on, dummy.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Back there, I was simply trying to make the point that this "conspiracy" must have started back in the times of Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras and Erosthanes.

Quote from: gg1gamer on December 12, 2016, 02:43:14 PM

Well to not piss of a certain real human being:

So could you 2 make your own thread in the discussion board and refrain yourselves from posting anything but an answer to the questions: which government supposedly started the conspiracy of a round earth and when?  (And all DIRECTLY related stuff is welcome as well.)

I thought cats were good doing that anywhere and everywhere.

I'll have to 'fess up and admit I probably started the rot with my reaction to being called a "dummy"

Quote from: rabinoz on December 09, 2016, 02:12:14 AM

And you have some basis for your pure guess that "Eratosthenes and Pythagoras were really saying different things"? Dream on, dummy.

Back there, I was simply trying to make the point that this "conspiracy" must have started back in the times of Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras and Erosthanes.

I don't care who started it, only who ends it.  And i have to say that your response is way more mature then this:

Wtf is your problem. (something) You're only singling me out because you don't like what I have to say. more something

And back to the on-topic stuff, yes indeed it seems like the conspiracy had to be dating back to the time of  Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras, Erosthanes and probably some others.  It seems rather strange to me that such a thing as the (supposed) flatness of the earth would be a rather big secret to keep hidden from the public. In over 2500 years not a single person from the government came out with some proof of this conspiracy (but people like Edward  Snowden nowadays ...) 

Also if i'm not mistaken the ruling government in the dark ages used to hang people that claimed that the earth was round.  So why was the ruling government first engaged in a conspiracy that was there to make the public believe that the earth was round.  A good 1000 years later they suddenly change to: hang whoever claims that the earth is round.  And now the government is supposedly back into the conspiracy?
I find this rather strange.

And back to the on-topic stuff, yes indeed it seems like the conspiracy had to be dating back to the time of  Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras, Erosthanes and probably some others.  It seems rather strange to me that such a thing as the (supposed) flatness of the earth would be a rather big secret to keep hidden from the public. In over 2500 years not a single person from the government came out with some proof of this conspiracy (but people like Edward  Snowden nowadays ...) 

Also if i'm not mistaken the ruling government in the dark ages used to hang people that claimed that the earth was round.  So why was the ruling government first engaged in a conspiracy that was there to make the public believe that the earth was round.  A good 1000 years later they suddenly change to: hang whoever claims that the earth is round.  And now the government is supposedly back into the conspiracy?
I find this rather strange.

Burning at the stake was rather in vogue back there too, but I don't think that "The Church" ever had the "shape of the earth" as an "article of faith", meaning that there was no heresy associated with belief either way.
From what I can gather, there certainly were those in the church who believed that the earth was flat, but it would seem that the dominant belief was that of the Globe.

This is a quote from an earlier post of mine:

The flat earth myth

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

One of the best-known proponents of a globe-shaped earth was the early English monk, theologian and historian, the Venerable Bede (673–735), who popularized the common BC/AD dating system. Less well known was that he was also a leading astronomer of his day.

In his book On the Reckoning of Time (De temporum ratione), among other things he calculated the creation of the world to be in 3952 BC, showed how to calculate the date of Easter, and explicitly taught that the earth was round. From this, he showed why the length of days and nights changed with the seasons, and how tides were dragged by the moon. Bede was the first with this insight, while Galileo explained the tides wrongly centuries later.

Here is what Bede said about the shape of the earth—round “like a ball” not “like a shield”:

“We call the earth a globe, not as if the shape of a sphere were expressed in the diversity of plains and mountains, but because, if all things are included in the outline, the earth’s circumference will represent the figure of a perfect globe. … For truly it is an orb placed in the centre of the universe; in its width it is like a circle, and not circular like a shield but rather like a ball, and it extends from its centre with perfect roundness on all sides.”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

And the leading church theologian and philosopher of the Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), wrote in his greatest work Summa Theologica/Theologiae:
        “The physicist proves the earth to be round by one means, the astronomer by another:
         for the latter proves this by means of mathematics, e.g. by the shapes of eclipses, or something of the sort;
         while the former proves it by means of physics, e.g. by the movement of heavy bodies towards the centre, and so forth.”

From: The flat earth myth and What did the early church really teach?

The Geocentric Universe was on the other hand, most certainly an article of faith and to deny that was to suffer dire consequences.
Even in Galileo's time, it was considered heresy, and it is this that got Galileo into trouble, not the shape of the earth.

So, if there ever was a "conspiracy" it would have to persist right through from around 500 BC till now.

Of course, our "PretendHumanBeing" will claim it was all done be the Illuminati and the "rewrote history".
So, I'm in trouble with Sandokhan for mentioning The Venerable Bede, who claims is an invention (Illuminati I guess?) and with Arealhumanbeing.
Sorry, but this just grew, but so many claim that "The Church" (meaning what is now the Roman Catholic Church) held that the earth was flat in the early centuries.
Don't get me started on early Islamic belief in the Globe,
         but they were far ahead of the west in astronomy and geodesy, largely because of their need to face Mecca when the pray.

The Geocentric Universe was on the other hand, most certainly an article of faith and to deny that was to suffer dire consequences.
Even in Galileo's time, it was considered heresy, and it is this that got Galileo into trouble, not the shape of the earth.

Yea, what do most FEers think about this?   Do they still believe in a Geocentric Universe or does or supposed flat disc turn around something?

So, if there ever was a "conspiracy" it would have to persist right through from around 500 BC till now.

A pretty damn long time to keep such a big secret as the flatness (supposed) of the earth, don't you think?

Of course, our "PretendHumanBeing" will claim it was all done be the Illuminati and the "rewrote history".
So, I'm in trouble with Sandokhan for mentioning The Venerable Bede, who claims is an invention (Illuminati I guess?) and with Arealhumanbeing.
Sorry, but this just grew, but so many claim that "The Church" (meaning what is now the Roman Catholic Church) held that the earth was flat in the early centuries.
Don't get me started on early Islamic belief in the Globe,
         but they were far ahead of the west in astronomy and geodesy, largely because of their need to face Mecca when the pray.

Any more trouble I can get into on one say?

Wait, my knowledge on the illuminati is rather limited, aren't they a mythical group of people who broke away from the roman catholic church to bring back some science but got a bit of track into magical stuff?  Or am i wrong there?

And what would the illuminati gain from such a conspiracy?

Where did you get that idea about the illuminati? Roman Catholic church... Thats make me smile lol What would they gain? What if everyone who wasn't part of the illuminati/freemasons was a slave like the African who were uprooted and taken to America? A government has that power through Marshall law and the population would have no choice. It would all be for "the greater good". Meanwhile the government "officials" would be munching on lobster laughing while we run their machines, make their food, and plow their fields for free, all under the idea that everyone is going through such hardships. It could all stem from another 9/11 situation where we must all sacrifice rights for the "national safety".

Where did you get that idea about the illuminati? Roman Catholic church... Thats make me smile lol What would they gain?

So i ask if the idea i have is right and you proceed to laugh(?) with me?  And don't even take the time to type out who they are?
I think i mentioned something about mature before.

What if everyone who wasn't part of the illuminati/freemasons was a slave like the African who were uprooted and taken to America?

What if everyone who wasn't left handed was a slave?  Wait, what does this question add to anything? 

A government has that power through Marshall law and the population would have no choice. It would all be for "the greater good". Meanwhile the government "officials" would be munching on lobster laughing while we run their machines, make their food, and plow their fields for free, all under the idea that everyone is going through such hardships. It could all stem from another 9/11 situation where we must all sacrifice rights for the "national safety".

Technically when material law is declared the highest ranking military leader becomes the leader of the country (in the case of the USA that's the president.  Here in belgium that would be the king, who has 0 power in normal situations).  Also marshal law removes all power of executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government.   Anyone who opened google and typed in martial law would know this, but i'm guessing you didn't do that?

Meanwhile the government "officials" would be munching on lobster laughing while we  As said, government officials would no longer have a job, so they become one of us, so they will be run their machines, make their food, and plow their fields for free, all under the idea that everyone is going through such hardships

we must all sacrifice rights for the "national safety"  So you'd rather have extremist doing all kind of terrorist attacks then lose a right or 2? 

And euhm, what exactly does any of this have to do with a supposed government conspiracy about the flatness of the earth?

And euhm, what exactly does any of this have to do with a supposed government conspiracy about the flatness of the earth?

Believing something false to be truth makes you stupid. Lying to a population about the shape of earth would make them stupid. Stupid people are easier to rule. What do governments do? Oh yeah, they make the laws, enforce the laws, and decide what's right and wrong. They rule.

Believing something false to be truth makes you stupid. Lying to a population about the shape of earth would make them stupid. Stupid people are easier to rule. What do governments do? Oh yeah, they make the laws, enforce the laws, and decide what's right and wrong. They rule.

Ignoring the off-topic stuff i said, I don't know what to think of that, is that good or bad?

"Believing something false to be truth makes you stupid"  So children are stupid?  I mean everyone know that santa claus doesn't exist.
"Stupid people are easier to rule." Yes and no, sometimes they are.  But if they are too stupid to understand what you are saying, good luck trying to make them do something.
"What do governments do? Oh yeah, they make the laws, enforce the laws, and decide what's right and wrong. They rule."  Wait i thought 'the people' vote for a government.  So the people decide what is right and wrong. 

And yet again i don't see any on-topic stuff in you reaction.

That's because he's clearly trolling you. Notice how he derails the thread? Asks you questions that have nothing to do with your topic? Makes statements that also have nothing to do with the topic? Have you noticed he does this on every thread?

That's because he's clearly trolling you. Notice how he derails the thread? Asks you questions that have nothing to do with your topic? Makes statements that also have nothing to do with the topic? Have you noticed he does this on every thread?

Yes, what do you suggest to do against trolls?  Personally i found (on other fora) that they lose interest if you don't let them get to you.

Quote from: IonSpen on December 13, 2016, 05:57:19 PM

That's because he's clearly trolling you. Notice how he derails the thread? Asks you questions that have nothing to do with your topic? Makes statements that also have nothing to do with the topic? Have you noticed he does this on every thread?

Yes, what do you suggest to do against trolls?  Personally i found (on other fora) that they lose interest if you don't let them get to you.

You are probably right, but the trouble is a lot get fun out of "Papa Bear baiting".

Quote from: IonSpen on December 13, 2016, 05:57:19 PM

That's because he's clearly trolling you. Notice how he derails the thread? Asks you questions that have nothing to do with your topic? Makes statements that also have nothing to do with the topic? Have you noticed he does this on every thread?

Yes, what do you suggest to do against trolls?  Personally i found (on other fora) that they lose interest if you don't let them get to you.

Ignore them if you want to. They sure will lose interest, just like you said. Call them out on it, then ignore them.

I was simply trying to make the point that this "conspiracy" must have started back in the times of Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras and Erosthanes.

And back to the on-topic stuff, yes indeed it seems like the conspiracy had to be dating back to the time of  Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras, Erosthanes and probably some others. 

The orgins of globularism were in the beliefs of the Pythagorean number cult. Platonic schools grew from the same root. There was no conspiracy. It was simply a mistaken belief.

A proper conspiracy regarding the shape of the earth is comparatively modern.

I do wonder about this conspiracy why they would fake the whole space thing rather than just make a significant part of the defense budget disappear for "secret" stuff. Seems more profitable as well as easier.

The orgins of globularism were in the beliefs of the Pythagorean number cult. Platonic schools grew from the same root. There was no conspiracy. It was simply a mistaken belief.

A proper conspiracy regarding the shape of the earth is comparatively modern.

So, when did they switch from mistaken belief to a conspiracy?

I do wonder about this conspiracy why they would fake the whole space thing rather than just make a significant part of the defense budget disappear for "secret" stuff. Seems more profitable as well as easier.

I am accused of being an alternate account, a troll and a plethora of bad names and yet this guy seems to legitametly think that telling a population that their money is going towards something ""secret"" is less conspicuous than creating a myth about space travel which convienantly 99 percent of the people cannot go to. Am I a troll...? If you think so, continue munching your fast food and flouridated beverages. If you think I make sense, get ready to fight the devil, for who else would lead men to lie such as they have...

So, when did they switch from mistaken belief to a conspiracy?

This is an exceedingly difficult question to answer. I generally try to avoid conspiracy topics in general, because it seems specious to me, but I will attempt to answer your question because it has been some time since I've posted on the matter.

I think the first trace of "the conspiracy" in general shows up in the 1100's. This is as far back as one can trace the Machiavellian writhings of the House of Guelph-Este. This is not exactly the question I believe you are asking, however. I believe you are asking when the conspiracy expanded to hide the shape of the earth began. This was somewhat later.

The global conspiracy traces to Nuremberg the 14th and 15th centuries and the ascendency of the BGMG under the House of Guelph. In the 15th century cartography was entering an exciting new time. New lands were being found. Previously uncharted islands, indeed even continents, were being added to world maps. The BGMG found a splendid way to find massive amounts of Royal funding (commissions). If you convince burgeoning world powers that their maps are completely inadequate and only a globe can accurately depict the earth, one is in for a lot of commissioned work. Add to that the fact globes became a status symbol in vogue among the wealthy of the period and you have an enormous cash cow.
But this ignores (or only scrapes) the actual depth of the plan. The goal of the BGMG was not map-making or wealth from it. The simple goal was power. To gain influence at court led to all sorts of potential for abuse of such power. This was an age where the court was the center of power; "scientists" vied to have their ideas heard. The difference between living in obscurity and becoming a household name was a "discovery" away.
Further, it was the Age of Discovery, where untold wealth might be a ship's journey away for a kingdom -- indeed this was the genesis of European imperialism. Map makers invented islands and continents to attain funding for expeditions. The closer you find yourselves to the strings of power, the more opportunity for corruption.

So unlike another FEer said is weren't the russians and the americans together when they started the space-race?

The BGMG found a splendid way to find massive amounts of Royal funding (commissions). If you convince burgeoning world powers that their maps are completely inadequate and only a globe can accurately depict the earth, one is in for a lot of commissioned work. Add to that the fact globes became a status symbol in vogue among the wealthy of the period and you have an enormous cash cow.

I thought they got funding so they could discover land that would become the property of the funder.  They didn't even care about maps in the beginning.
Also it was rather hard to make an accurate depiction of the earth because they had to draw a round object on a flat map, as i understand it.  So they had to put into figuring out how to do this.  Couldn't they simply have drawn a FE and charged that time they now didn't have to spend?

But this ignores (or only scrapes) the actual depth of the plan. The goal of the BGMG was not map-making or wealth from it. The simple goal was power. To gain influence at court led to all sorts of potential for abuse of such power.

How does presenting a new theory give one power?  I mean, you guys are presenting a new theory (FE), do you feel powerful?  (i'm gonne get troll-like reactions for this question, won't I?) 
Whenever someone introduces something new he'll face conservatives, who are usually with more than the people introducing something new.  Introducing something new is rather tricky.

This was an age where the court was the center of power; "scientists" vied to have their ideas heard. The difference between living in obscurity and becoming a household name was a "discovery" away.

It was a bit more tricky than that.

Further, it was the Age of Discovery, where untold wealth might be a ship's journey away for a kingdom -- indeed this was the genesis of European imperialism. Map makers invented islands and continents to attain funding for expeditions. The closer you find yourselves to the strings of power, the more opportunity for corruption.

Euhm, the link doesn't work.  But i can believe that there were idiots who tried to invent islands.  However it would rather quickly be discovered that they invented them as the funders wanted to gain money from these islands.
In any system you'll always have people that get corrupted, i believe we got at least one or 2 examples of this on this forum.

Quote from: RocksEverywhere on December 13, 2016, 11:54:18 PM

I do wonder about this conspiracy why they would fake the whole space thing rather than just make a significant part of the defense budget disappear for "secret" stuff. Seems more profitable as well as easier.

I am accused of being an alternate account, a troll and a plethora of bad names and yet this guy seems to legitametly think that telling a population that their money is going towards something ""secret"" is less conspicuous than creating a myth about space travel which convienantly 99 percent of the people cannot go to. Am I a troll...? If you think so, continue munching your fast food and flouridated beverages. If you think I make sense, get ready to fight the devil, for who else would lead men to lie such as they have...

I'm not sure where this comes from, but I'm 100% certain that not all of the defense's expenses are public.

Quote from: Arealhumanbeing on December 14, 2016, 07:27:48 AM

Quote from: RocksEverywhere on December 13, 2016, 11:54:18 PM

I do wonder about this conspiracy why they would fake the whole space thing rather than just make a significant part of the defense budget disappear for "secret" stuff. Seems more profitable as well as easier.

I am accused of being an alternate account, a troll and a plethora of bad names and yet this guy seems to legitametly think that telling a population that their money is going towards something ""secret"" is less conspicuous than creating a myth about space travel which convienantly 99 percent of the people cannot go to. Am I a troll...? If you think so, continue munching your fast food and flouridated beverages. If you think I make sense, get ready to fight the devil, for who else would lead men to lie such as they have...

I'm not sure where this comes from, but I'm 100% certain that not all of the defense's expenses are public.

Where it came from? It came from the thought that you are dumb enough to allow things to be spent on "secret" stuff. If your receipt from the grocery store had 50 dollars expended for a "secret" , you would complain yes? But if it said "taxes" next to it, theres nothing you can do. So why wouldn't the government uphold a myth so they can spend money on something entirely different...