Fallacy, good sir. You're trying to argue from a position of incredulity. How big of a lie would you tell if I offered you $50 million? Do you think it would be difficult to find 600 people in the world who would take a lie to their grave for $1 mill?
https://youtu.be/3yYdQbKCSC8?t=618
There's actually 6 questions now. You'd have to go on and discuss these, because it's far too much to cover over text, and I want it recorded for posterity. Go back and watch people try and answer them. It's quite entertaining.
So you might be thinking that I was making an appeal to authority, but I’m not. What I’m doing is making a comparison to bitcoin. I’m saying that after a certain number of people see the truth, the cost to keep them all quiet becomes infeasible. So then it’s an open question of how much money or threat of violence is available, and how long until you run into that one psycho who’s willing to suffer whatever they can do to them to tell the world the truth.
Yeah, I’ll check out those questions
Incredulity, where you believe that hiding such a thing would be too difficult for you to imagine being possible. "No way that so many people would be in on it, can you imagine how difficult it would be to keep that under wraps?" That's incredulity.
It's also fallacious because I used to believe in this model. Was I lying? No, I genuinely believed it. Most people aren't lying, they really do believe these things.
I think you underestimate the lengths that our controllers will go to maintain control over a narrative. The way systems are built up and structured. Study the masons. Study compartmentalisation. It exists in every facet of our lives; things are conducted on a need-to-know basis, a good example of this is a simple corporation, or government, or military.
In reality, that growing list of questions is a slam-dunk on the globe model. Most people think it's all so crazy because they will never take the time to look into it; likely for fear of what they will find. For the most part, all I ever hear are truly elementary questions from the uninitiated.
Funny how this channel, which discusses this sort of stuff almost exclusively, was demonetised yesterday for 'harmful content'. Where there is censorship, there is truth.
Ohhhhh, so you think astronauts genuinely believe they orbited earth. Interesting… how?
Hmm, I think it would be a logical fallacy if I concluded that flat earth is false because the cost to keep 606 people quiet is too high. Instead I’m arguing that the effect of this fact on our Bayesian reasoning about the question should be to reduce our assigned likelihood of the flat earth hypothesis. I think you’d agree with that, but then you’d say that other factors raise the correct probability.
But I’ve been wondering what you think of Snowden? He seems to contradict the idea that people in power successfully control the spread of information?
To what degree? How many people believe January 6th was an “insurrection”? I consider trump entertainment and I’m not American, but that is clear as day nonsense, which most people I speak to seem to believe. Most people also believe climate change is a real problem, CO2 is a threat, and vaccines are safe and effective. Wouldn’t you agree?
What you get is the impression that it’s a minority, and I believe it’s a manufactured impression. FE is larger than you think. Go look up polls and stats, it’s growing and ranges from 10% to 35% of people depending where you look. It’s just most don’t mention it in polite company for fear of ridicule.
In the same way when I tell people vaccines are untested for safety, they have the same visceral reaction, yet they will never go look it up for themselves. It really is how I ended up here.
Instead of guessing why people would lie or trying to figure out how these things work at scale (indoctrination, repetitive propaganda from a young age, keeping people addicted to their TVs and trusting the so called experts, along with compartmentalised systems and largely bought off politicians world wide which made things like a global lockdown possible), its a lot easier to make sense of consistency in claims of observable science and things they claim “we know”.
If you ever find answers to any of those 6 questions alone, let me know. People will suggest “it doesn’t matter”, but if Im supposed to believe such insane claims, the only way is with good evidence, which I don’t believe they have. Instead we have fringe, twist ourselves in a knots experiments to prove imaginary forces with incredibly inconsistent and broken theories and logical issues that most people have never taken the time to consider, so it short circuits their brains.
"Most people" My neighbor's beliefs, and he has no first hand knowledge about the climate but has beliefs about it, rightly do not update my Bayesian math very much.
It's not surprising to me that x % believe anything. Truth is difficult to ascertain. So I 100% agree that most people see indoctrinated. Nearly everyone is working from someone else's first hand data. Most people just believe what other people believe. Some people just believe the opposite of what everyone believes.
I'm still curious if Snowden is a violation of your world view or expected as he is in mine.
And haha this is lame I know and I’m sorry idk what my problem is but my perception has been that when I opened those links they were not giving a list of questions. But maybe it was the continuing long period of time after the timestamp? Haha I'm falling.
🫂
I didn’t make why that’s clear to bitcoin as obvious as I thought I did. But think softwar stuff.
Asymmetric cryptography makes it possible for us to keep our bitcoin safe because it raises the cost of executing an unapproved transfer to the point of infeasibility - even for nation states!
Similarly, the more people that claim to have orbited earth, the higher the cost is of keeping them all quiet. At some point even nation states can’t maintain the ruse.
