WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

[The Fish 10856]

2 minutes ago, wolfy said:

If a person tells you lies or you believe a person is telling lies, then you will be very sceptical of anything that comes out of their mouths.

It's no different with anything for those who are sceptical.

The issue is in how and why a person becomes sceptical or thoroughly untrusting in the first place.

All normal people like to believe they're intelligent and above naivety/gullibility but the truth is that very few, if any are beyond it.

It all comes down to trusting the genuine salesman or the snake oil salesman.

Take your pick.

I mean, this is just staggering arrogance right here. 

"Oh you all may think you're clever, but I'm actually the only clever one because I made some shit up."It's just fascinating to me that someone can be so deluded.

 

Have you ever heard of Occam's razor? Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

Your hypotheses are solely assumptions, the competing hypotheses have some assumptions, but also have empirical or anecdotal evidence.

 

 

[wolfy 12]

Just now, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

Making up bollocks with zero basis of empirical evidence is not being inquisitive, in fact it's the opposite. It is lazy I can't be arsed shite to gain attention since your wife fucked off with the science teacher.

Feel free to believe anything you wish to, in life.

 

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3892]

Just now, wolfy said:

Feel free to believe anything you wish to, in life.

 

 

Belief is confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof. You believe in your made up bollocks, I will accept the years of empirical scientific output and  knowledge.

[wolfy 12]

1 minute ago, The Fish said:

I mean, this is just staggering arrogance right here. 

"Oh you all may think you're clever, but I'm actually the only clever one because I made some shit up."It's just fascinating to me that someone can be so deluded.

 

Have you ever heard of Occam's razor? Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

Your hypotheses are solely assumptions, the competing hypotheses have some assumptions, but also have empirical or anecdotal evidence.

 

 

Yeah, tell me about Occam's razor and the fewest assumptions with the stuff you've been schooled into.

Let's see how the fewest assumptions work with facts.

I've yet to see any facts given out by you.

Water is flat and level.

There's Occam's razor right there.

 

[wolfy 12]

2 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

Belief is confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof. You believe in your made up bollocks, I will accept the years of empirical scientific output and  knowledge.

No problem with me. You and millions upon millions of people will be of the same thoughts and you are absolutely welcome to them.

Edited May 24, 2017 by wolfy

[The Fish 10856]

Just curious @wolfy, you reject the status quo because you don't believe the proof, right? Yet you believe your own hypothesis without any proof. Why? 

 

Bear in mind saying "It just makes logical sense" is not a good enough answer as it fundamentally doesn't.

[The Fish 10856]

10 minutes ago, wolfy said:

Yeah, tell me about Occam's razor and the fewest assumptions with the stuff you've been schooled into.

Let's see how the fewest assumptions work with facts.

I've yet to see any facts given out by you.

Water is flat and level.

There's Occam's razor right there.

 

That's not what Occam's Razor means.

 

I've shown you liquid surrounding a sphere. 

 

You're hypothesis relies on many more assumptions than mine. 

Edited May 24, 2017 by The Fish

[Rayvin 5219]

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Just curious @wolfy, you reject the status quo because you don't believe the proof, right? Yet you believe your own hypothesis without any proof. Why? 

 

Bear in mind saying "It just makes logical sense" is not a good enough answer as it fundamentally doesn't.

 

The real one for me that has no firm answer from Wolfy is why anyone would have gone to the bother of arranging all of this 'cover up'. He's said before that people don't deviate from the official line because they're afraid of stepping out of received wisdom, which is consistent with his overall view about his outlook versus everyone else's.

Wolfy absolutely does believe that he is intellectually superior to most people, in that he can 'see the world for what it is'. The proof and evidence doesn't come into it, because to accept those, he would have to accept the possibility of other people's intellects outdoing his own.

 

That'd be right, wouldn't it Wolfy? I say this not to bait you, it's literally because this simply must be true.

[wolfy 12]

2 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Just curious @wolfy, you reject the status quo because you don't believe the proof, right? Yet you believe your own hypothesis without any proof. Why? 

 

Bear in mind saying "It just makes logical sense" is not a good enough answer as it fundamentally doesn't.

 For any investigator to follow a thought process, they must have some kind of belief in that line of reasoning.

That's what I do. I dissect the supposed globe and stuff whilst experimenting on various stuff to disprove a lot of what's been ingrained into our minds.

This doesn't mean that my disproving will be accepted by anyone. I'm not naive enough to think anything like that.

It's up to anyone to either accept what they're coaxed into accepting or challenge it for themselves, if anything.

 

I don't say I'm correct. I probably won't ever know what the entirety of this Earth is or what it's part of, but I know that what we are being told about it is absolute nonsense as far as I'm concerned.

What you go with is entirely up to you.

 

 

[wolfy 12]

9 minutes ago, The Fish said:

That's not what Occam's Razor means.

 

I've shown you liquid surrounding a sphere. 

 

You're hypothesis relies on many more assumptions than mine. 

It's not a hypothesis it is a FACT.

Any person will tell you that water is flat and level if nobody was around to force their hand by mass peer pressure.

People will totally abandon basic thought and logic in favour of nonsense if mass peer pressure can force their hand to accept that nonsense as they do with a globe Earth and supposed oceans just sticking to it, whilst also somehow being pulled about by a supposed moon and a big 93 million mile distant, 850,000 mile diameter sun that just happens to look exactly the same size  and yet we are told it's because of the distance making it appear that way.

 

And blah blah, all the rest of the gunk that so called space scientists throw at us.

 

[tooner 243]

11 minutes ago, wolfy said:

 For any investigator to follow a thought process, they must have some kind of belief in that line of reasoning.

That's what I do. I dissect the supposed globe and stuff whilst experimenting on various stuff to disprove a lot of what's been ingrained into our minds.

This doesn't mean that my disproving will be accepted by anyone. I'm not naive enough to think anything like that.

It's up to anyone to either accept what they're coaxed into accepting or challenge it for themselves, if anything.

 

I don't say I'm correct. I probably won't ever know what the entirety of this Earth is or what it's part of, but I know that what we are being told about it is absolute nonsense as far as I'm concerned.

What you go with is entirely up to you.

 

 

please provide proof of your experiments and your findings and stuff from said experiments

[The Fish 10856]

2 minutes ago, wolfy said:

 For any investigator to follow a thought process, they must have some kind of belief in that line of reasoning.

That's what I do. I dissect the supposed globe and stuff whilst experimenting on various stuff to disprove a lot of what's been ingrained into our minds.

This doesn't mean that my disproving will be accepted by anyone. I'm not naive enough to think anything like that.

It's up to anyone to either accept what they're coaxed into accepting or challenge it for themselves, if anything.

 

I don't say I'm correct. I probably won't ever know what the entirety of this Earth is or what it's part of, but I know that what we are being told about it is absolute nonsense as far as I'm concerned.

What you go with is entirely up to you.

 

 

 

Cool cool cool, but you didn't answer my question. You just said how wonderfully open minded you are and how everyone else is just happy to go along with the status quo, because they're not dead brave like you are.

 

So I'll ask again, if you refute the status quo because you don't believe the evidence and proof. Why do you believe your own theory when you've no evidence or proof?

 

For a theory to be considered acceptable it must be proven or at least supported by evidence, you admit this is the cornerstone of your dissension. You don't believe the proof, nor the evidence, so you cannot accept the theory.

 

Your theory isn't proven nor is it supported by any evidence, so by your own logic, you must also refute this theory.

[wolfy 12]

14 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

The real one for me that has no firm answer from Wolfy is why anyone would have gone to the bother of arranging all of this 'cover up'. He's said before that people don't deviate from the official line because they're afraid of stepping out of received wisdom, which is consistent with his overall view about his outlook versus everyone else's.

Wolfy absolutely does believe that he is intellectually superior to most people, in that he can 'see the world for what it is'. The proof and evidence doesn't come into it, because to accept those, he would have to accept the possibility of other people's intellects outdoing his own.

 

That'd be right, wouldn't it Wolfy? I say this not to bait you, it's literally because this simply must be true.

Nahhh, it's not right. I don't think I'm any more intelligent or superior than anyone.

Apparently I'm more mentally unstable if you remember, so there's no real need to worry about me being superior, is there?

You're trying to reason with me whilst knowing that I'm mentally challenged or mentally ill. Does this make any rational sense to you or were you just kidding?

 

I bore you but you feel the need to engage me.

It's pretty hard working out the mindset of some, but, each to their own, right?

As far as baiting me. I'm the one that's the troll; right?

Hmmm.

Anyway, where were we?

[The Fish 10856]

8 minutes ago, wolfy said:

It's not a hypothesis it is a FACT.

Any person will tell you that water is flat and level if nobody was around to force their hand by mass peer pressure.

People will totally abandon basic thought and logic in favour of nonsense if mass peer pressure can force their hand to accept that nonsense as they do with a globe Earth and supposed oceans just sticking to it, whilst also somehow being pulled about by a supposed moon and a big 93 million mile distant, 850,000 mile diameter sun that just happens to look exactly the same size  and yet we are told it's because of the distance making it appear that way.

 

And blah blah, all the rest of the gunk that so called space scientists throw at us.

 

 

 

[wolfy 12]

5 minutes ago, tooner said:

please provide proof of your experiments and your findings and stuff from said experiments

I'd say to you that, if you're unsure of the official line you were given, then question it. Start investigating it and see what you can find.

Start with water.

Go down to your local pool or to a lake and see if you can see it curve.

Get a football and pour water on it whilst rotating it slowly and see if the water stays on.

Get a chamber and evacuate air from it and see if a fan works inside of it and if not, wonder how satellites can have working components in so called space without atmosphere to cool, even though we're conned with radiation of heat, somehow and yet down on Earth, we need fans and stuff to cool them.

Why do we need fans to cool down here if radiation works fine and dandy up in so called space.

It's a million things like this that you need to ask yourself. Not for me. Do it for you.

[tooner 243]

4 minutes ago, wolfy said:

I'd say to you that, if you're unsure of the official line you were given, then question it. Start investigating it and see what you can find.

Start with water.

Go down to your local pool or to a lake and see if you can see it curve.

Get a football and pour water on it whilst rotating it slowly and see if the water stays on.

Get a chamber and evacuate air from it and see if a fan works inside of it and if not, wonder how satellites can have working components in so called space without atmosphere to cool, even though we're conned with radiation of heat, somehow and yet down on Earth, we need fans and stuff to cool them.

Why do we need fans to cool down here if radiation works fine and dandy up in so called space.

It's a million things like this that you need to ask yourself. Not for me. Do it for you.

 WRONG!!!! this not what was asked of you, provide your findings from your experiments. 

maybe read a book 

Edited May 24, 2017 by tooner

[Rayvin 5219]

11 minutes ago, wolfy said:

Nahhh, it's not right. I don't think I'm any more intelligent or superior than anyone.

Apparently I'm more mentally unstable if you remember, so there's no real need to worry about me being superior, is there?

You're trying to reason with me whilst knowing that I'm mentally challenged or mentally ill. Does this make any rational sense to you or were you just kidding?

 

I bore you but you feel the need to engage me.

It's pretty hard working out the mindset of some, but, each to their own, right?

As far as baiting me. I'm the one that's the troll; right?

Hmmm.

Anyway, where were we?

 

I'm not the one who said you were mentally ill. That was Renton (I think). I've not said anything to you aside from trying to understand why you think the way you do. I don't think you're mentally ill.

Edited May 24, 2017 by Rayvin

[wolfy 12]

13 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Quote

 If you refute the status quo because you don't believe the evidence and proof. Why do you believe your own theory when you've no evidence or proof?

I go with my own theory because it's a better fit than the nonsense of a globe model and all the trimmings put together with it.

My evidence is not recognised by people who do not see anything wrong with the model handed to them on a plate. I understand that.

 

13 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Quote

For a theory to be considered acceptable it must be proven or at least supported by evidence, you admit this is the cornerstone of your dissension. You don't believe the proof, nor the evidence, so you cannot accept the theory.

Water is flat and level. It is testable and repeatable.

Where is your factual evidence for a globe?

13 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Your theory isn't proven nor is it supported by any evidence, so by your own logic, you must also refute this theory.

By my own logic I can follow what has a potential better fit than anything else I look over.

Whether it is all correct or only half right, or even 0.1% right, is neither here nor there. It's about people questioning their own indoctrination about their own Earth model they were given.

Mine is secondary to that and is my own thought process that people can try and understand as a mere musing or dismiss out of hand.

 

I do my stuff for me where this is concerned but equally I have no issue sharing my thoughts to people who are interested.

Anyway, like I say, the issue is the nonsense globe model as far as I'm concerned. As far as people are concerned, it's entirely up to them if they have a mind to spend on investigating it all.

[Meenzer 15524]

7 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

I'm not the one who said you were mentally ill. That was Renton (I think). I've not said anything to you aside from trying to understand why you think the way you do. I don't think you're mentally ill.

 

We're all clones parroting the same mainstream opinion though, remember. So in fact you are Renton. HAH!

[wolfy 12]

9 minutes ago, tooner said:

 WRONG!!!! this not what was asked of you, provide your findings from your experiments. 

maybe read a book 

Ahhhhh, read a book. Hmmmmm.

Guess what I did all my life up until I started to think for myself?

[Alex 35077]

Make sense?

[wolfy 12]

10 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

I'm not the one who said you were mentally ill. That was Renton (I think). I've not said anything to you aside from trying to understand why you think the way you do. I don't think you're mentally ill.

Please accept my sincere apologies.

I've had to sift through a lot of replies and wrongly assumed you had mentioned it.

Sorry about that.

[Meenzer 15524]

1 minute ago, Alex said:

Make sense?

 

 

[The Fish 10856]

34 minutes ago, wolfy said:

I'd say to you that, if you're unsure of the official line you were given, then question it. Start investigating it and see what you can find.

Start with water.

Go down to your local pool or to a lake and see if you can see it curve.

Get a football and pour water on it whilst rotating it slowly and see if the water stays on.

Get a chamber and evacuate air from it and see if a fan works inside of it and if not, wonder how satellites can have working components in so called space without atmosphere to cool, even though we're conned with radiation of heat, somehow and yet down on Earth, we need fans and stuff to cool them.

Why do we need fans to cool down here if radiation works fine and dandy up in so called space.

It's a million things like this that you need to ask yourself. Not for me. Do it for you.

 

Nobody has any problem with you questioning the official story, it's your abandonment of your own standards when it comes to your theory. 

 

 

You aren't grasping large objects. Water droplets will sit proud from a surface, but go see if a bathtub of water will sit proud outside of the container, or a bucket, or a thimble sized hotel glass. It won't, yet we understand that viscosity of water permits it to act differently given the amount of water observed. Similarly large objects (a planet) have properties that are significantly different to smaller objects (football)

 

Obviously because conduction and convection are more efficient methods of transferring internal energy within earth's atmosphere. We don't "need" fans, they're just better for the circumstances. Just like you don't "need" trains to get from A to B, they're just more efficient.

 

Edited May 24, 2017 by The Fish

[tooner 243]

25 minutes ago, wolfy said:

Ahhhhh, read a book. Hmmmmm.

Guess what I did all my life up until I started to think for myself?

<sigh>  no experiments then? 

Edited May 24, 2017 by tooner