People lost to conspiracy theories



the idea that people used to think the earth was flat is actually a modern misconception.

"no educated person in the history of Western Civilisation from the third century BC onward believed that the earth was flat".

Only because they didn't have YouTube. ;)
 
Give ower man, he doesn't understand at all and this is why he's talking about the earth rotating at 1,000mph, the laser not even hitting the reflector on the moon and roundabouts.

"I'm simply saying that we are told the earth rotates at over 1000 mph and a laser pointed at a specific thing like a supposed retroreflector would never hit it to come back to source.

It's like sitting on a roundabout and aiming a laser at a person in the playground and expecting it to come right back at you even though your laser aim has missed the person due to your rotation.

It doesn't matter how far it spreads. You're not going to be hitting any retro reflector with a spread laser and have it come back to point of origin.

The earth would move nearly a mile and so would the angle of it's laser beam origin, which has to receive the laser reflection back to that point."


He clearly can't understand that you don't need to be at the same point of origin to see a reflection of a laser beam that has grown bigger due to divergence over a distance. If you have the start point and time and the end point and time then you can work out the distance. I think that's my side of the 'debate' exhausted so will bow out now :lol:
You only understand it because you've been told it works when it clearly would not.
:lol:
*Wibbling intensifies*
Feel free to quote your own quotes. :lol:
By that definition, are you saying that nothing can be proven unless you can do it yourself?

What other way can you verify something if you can't use other sources?
What I'm saying is, in a debate, people have their own side and all cannot be correct in that argument.
Unless someone has legitimate proof of something they're getting debated on then that debate simply rumbles on with arguments from each side trying to place reasoning to show evidence of a reality or a denial of it being that.

This is where we're all at with this stuff we're all debating.
People can appeal to authority as much as they want to in their argument but if they cannot verify it then they cannot take the higher pedestal on it.

If you're arguing with me on...say.....a ball in the distance. We can both see a ball shape but neither of us know or can move to that distance.
You say it's a football and I say it's a tennis ball.
As it stands we are neither right or wrong but are debating it, using all available arguments.

If a group of journalists pulled up beside us and said it was a football because they've been told by some scientists who went that far and saw it.
Then you can claim victory in your debate with me base of nothing more than your adherence to the words from that group.

If I could walk that distance to verify it for myself then I would know. You would feel no need to as your guess is backed by the masses against my lone self.

And this is basically how all this stuff goes.
 
Last edited:
This thread started with the OP asking why some people are lost to conspiracy theories. In my first post in this thread I said they have an idea, stick to it and then just dig dig dig, getting more absurd to ‘prove’ it is right. Actual fact is dismissed with a ‘nah bollocks’ and no reason given, just ‘it don’t make no sense to me’. Basically something does not fit their personal expectations of the world so conspiracy. When people explain how it works, it is dismissed as bollocks but without any explanation why, often a wacky idea is put in its place without any reasoning and people who have an education and know stuff are branded sheep not thinking for themselves.

This has been demonstrated beautifully, in the discussion about laser range finding, though is missing a mental theory to replace it. Essentially the whole discussion comes down to the understanding (or rather lack of) of the geometry of a cone. This is something really basic that Euclid formalised 2500 years ago.

Note carefully that the specifics have not been dismissed. At no point has divergence of laser beams been dismissed or the maths that over the distance of earth to moon the divergence only has to be tiny. Two basic facts put together to make something very simple possible, but the whole concept has been dismissed as bollocks. If one or the other had been picked up and discussed then it would be a reasoned debate, but this is the joining of the two that seems to be the issue.

The fact it is so simple leads me to believe that nobody can really be that stupid. how it works was never though about originally, inside the CT is thinking ‘oh shit yes’, but has to maintain an internet persona. Either this is because they can’t admit a mistake or lack of knowledge or is on a windup and is desperate for the attention. Dig dig dig, keep it going and please feed the troll.

As predicted there have been the typical CT phrases “there is no proof”, blindly ignoring that three or four people have provided detailed truth and explanations. This is then used as reason to not provide truth themselves. When asked specific questions about two of the basic facts, those questions are ignored. And true to form, the insults and sheep branding comes out when backed into a corner, in this case “you only understand because it is what you have been told”, implying blind regurgitated information and no understanding. It is a little jibe designed to provoke a reaction or someone hitting out because they are backed into a corner looking silly.

Then of course there is the idea that competing world governments are acting together to pretend to the world it is a thing, even when many of the places using the mirrors are places like universities, not government scientist silos (which don’t exist). It would have been cheaper and easier to just say “Lunar dust has covered the mirrors” and stop spending money pretending, but no. Even this simple bit of a theory gets more complex the more you look at it, and there is actually no reason for doing it anyway.

The whole conspiracy theorist mindset is fascinating. It is either abject paranoia or a strange willing to pretend to be stupid, just to get attention. Interesting to watch but I don’t think I’ll ever understand what drives it.
 
Basically something does not fit their personal expectations of the world so conspiracy. When people explain how it works, it is dismissed as bollocks but without any explanation why, often a wacky idea is put in its place without any reasoning and people who have an education and know stuff are branded sheep not thinking for themselves.

This has been demonstrated beautifully, in the discussion about laser range finding, though is missing a mental theory to replace it. Essentially the whole discussion comes down to the understanding (or rather lack of) of the geometry of a cone. This is something really basic that Euclid formalised 2500 years ago.

Note carefully that the specifics have not been dismissed. At no point has divergence of laser beams been dismissed or the maths that over the distance of earth to moon the divergence only has to be tiny. Two basic facts put together to make something very simple possible, but the whole concept has been dismissed as bollocks. If one or the other had been picked up and discussed then it would be a reasoned debate, but this is the joining of the two that seems to be the issue.
This!
You only understand it because you've been told it works when it clearly would not.
Logon or register to see this image
 
What I'm saying is, in a debate, people have their own side and all cannot be correct in that argument.
Unless someone has legitimate proof of something they're getting debated on then that debate simply rumbles on with arguments from each side trying to place reasoning to show evidence of a reality or a denial of it being that.

This is where we're all at with this stuff we're all debating.
People can appeal to authority as much as they want to in their argument but if they cannot verify it then they cannot take the higher pedestal on it.

If you're arguing with me on...say.....a ball in the distance. We can both see a ball shape but neither of us know or can move to that distance.
You say it's a football and I say it's a tennis ball.
As it stands we are neither right or wrong but are debating it, using all available arguments.

If a group of journalists pulled up beside us and said it was a football because they've been told by some scientists who went that far and saw it.
Then you can claim victory in your debate with me base of nothing more than your adherence to the words from that group.

If I could walk that distance to verify it for myself then I would know. You would feel no need to as your guess is backed by the masses against my lone self.

And this is basically how all this stuff goes.

Bless man :lol:

You've found an angle that lets you dismiss phenomena that exceed your intellectual capacity, without having to engage in debate and go through having each and every point objectively taken apart. No matter how wrong you are, you can't be wrong, because you don't believe it :lol:
 
Bless man :lol:

You've found an angle that lets you dismiss phenomena that exceed your intellectual capacity, without having to engage in debate and go through having each and every point objectively taken apart. No matter how wrong you are, you can't be wrong, because you don't believe it :lol:
I'm more than happy to be wrong if someone can prove what I'm arguing against, is correct.
Appealing to authority by someone who does not hold any facts, does not make something a truth.
Sounds quasi cultish to me. Blind faith without evidence and often despite evidence.
Most adherence of the masses to hypothetical science, is blind faith.
 
Last edited:
I'm more than happy to be wrong if someone can prove what I'm arguing against, is correct.
Appealing to authority by someone who does not hold any facts, does not make something a truth.

Most adherence of the masses to hypothetical science, is blind faith.
We could do a little test. We could go to the top of a high building. I will push you off. Science states, because of gravity you will plummet to your death. But with your mindset, you probably believe gravity is a hoax. A blind faith. A hypothetical science. Not to be trusted. In the name of science, im willing to test it and risk being proven wrong. If you’re right and I’m wrong and you survive, I will bestow upon you all my worldly possessions. Sound fair?
 

Back
Top