Rampage explains how outer space is a hoax

[Andy Capp]

When I mentioned the spinning I meant all the ai models of the entire universe spinning and spiraling through space and past God knows what in the background. Again I'm not denying anything at all I'm just looking at things and if they don't make sense that's what I'm saying. I still find that picture and video to look pretty fake and shitty and would put myself at a coin flip on wether it's real as they release a lot of rendered photos and junk .

Did you see any of my photos ITT? I mean the ones I personally took, that is.

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

Why are you asking him even more questions that he can't answer. He's already having a tough time.

It’s a point and laugh at the imbecile session at this point. I love allowing flerfs to expose their ignorance for us all to enjoy!

 

[Deleted member 577981]

I mean.. its silly to waste time on any of this, but here we are..

It's only silly if your motives are silly themselves. The problem of experts and when to trust experts and when not to and why is one of the main pressing problems right now for our society. It's a significant issue.

Threads like this give a person who's interested in learning, deep insight into the two camps that have lost their way. The first one being science deniers who just knee jerk react and don't trust the system anymore and the other is in those types of people who believe that science and the establishments are the same thing and to blindly follow established thinking without ever really looking into anything.

Personally, I find this question as to how people get so lost and muddled extremely and profoundly interesting as do many thinkers and philosophers today and so if you approach these threads and many others like them with a larger perspective in mind, there is no waste of time whatsoever.

For the most part though, my observation is that when these two groups get so off track it comes down to tribalism and emotionalism. It's not really a problem with thinking. It's a problem with not applying thinking when emotions and false identities overrule that need.

For me nearly no thread is ever about the topic itself. It's always about the social, psychological, emotional, spiritual and intellectual dynamics being played out in the thread.

If you are not caught up in the outcome or in winning or in mocking other people, you can come to learn a great deal about humanity this way.

 

[CyberRubberDuck]

So every experiment of all time needs to be able to be done by everyone, everywhere for it to be valid?! Terrible logic.
Just because you don’t understand Science or experiments doesn’t make it invalid; it simple means youre uneducated.
Btw the way, the fact that you don’t understand how to measure rotation, which is not in MPH but RPM, means you are completely unqualified to have this conversation.
How did you get so confident in your ignorance?

Follow the thread back. You will see that I was replying to someone saying "anyone can do it".
Now you ask me why that's a requirement.

Follow the convo if you're going to comment on it.

 

[BearGrounds]

How dare you belittle all the YouTube University students out there. Someone said it, and the comments on the video agreed. What more proof do you need?!

There's lectures, documentaries, tutorials, etc. on YT, for a myriad of subjects.

It's kind of dumb to try and insult someone for learning on a platform full of information.

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

Follow the thread back. You will see that I was replying to someone saying "anyone can do it".
Now you ask me why that's a requirement.

Follow the convo if you're going to comment on it.

Which you then shifted into
A) it depends on who is running the tests and posting online.
2) it could just be bouncing off the moon
And D) lasers spread so you couldn't read the bounce anyway (then how could you read it bouncing off the moon?)

Extra Credit: you incorrectly tried to drop a little factoid about the earth spinning and how you couldn't lock on to anything anyway.

Also, how's that USSR answer coming? You've had plenty of time to ignore it and then go look on YouTube.

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

There's lectures, documentaries, tutorials, etc. on YT, for a myriad of subjects.

It's kind of dumb to try and insult someone for learning on a platform full of information.

I learn on YouTube all the time, but I've never once claimed to be an expert on a subject because of only one source of information, let alone crowd sourced and not fact checked, like YouTube. It's kind of dumb to read what you want between the lines when it isn't there.

 

[BearGrounds]

I learn on YouTube all the time, but I've never once claimed to be an expert on a subject because of only one source of information, let alone crowd sourced and not fact checked, like YouTube. It's kind of dumb to read what you want between the lines when it isn't there.

I haven't seen anybody claim to be an expert based off of one source ITT, but perhaps I missed it. You can become pretty well versed in a topic on YT given there's enough good lecture material. It can act as a multi-source.

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

I haven't seen anybody claim to be an expert based off of one source ITT, but perhaps I missed it. You can become pretty well versed in a topic on YT given there's enough good lecture material.

Would you consider that more the rule, or the exception?

 

[BearGrounds]

Would you consider that more the rule, or the exception?

What, that people learn on YT, as opposed to being misled?

Are you asking me which I think happens more?

 

[BearGrounds]

This is to reply to your edit.

Certainly I could understand the scenario you laid out as happening a lot of the time. On the other hand, I'm just not confident in saying absolutely 100% of all supposed bigfoot sightings are fake or mis-identified black bears. Even if most bigfoot reports fall under this category, that still leaves a certain percentage that is unexplained. Certainly, the kind of people who grew up and/or hunt and camp in the woods are very aware of tracking certain animals, etc., and know what black bears look like. They seem to be pretty adamant of what they saw, and often the description is quite a bit different that what a bear looks and acts like. Some even have video and audio of the vocalizations which anyone can run through a spectrum analyzer and come to the same conclusions that humans cannot produce those particular frequencies. Could they be put ons, or fakes, sure, but again, I just have a difficult time committing to an absolute and saying 100% are fake.

I don't know what it is, but something is happening to either cause people to collectively hallucinate (in corroborated reports of more than 1 person), or it's some kind of collective unconscious archetype (Jung). Maybe densely packed forests have some kind of endogenous psychedelic that we don't know about and that is what is causing the phenomena - I just don't know.

Black Bear is just a lazy way for people to write everything off. They haven't given it much thought if they think black bears can account for most sightings. Any case in which a track is left it can be ruled out immediately, for starters. But I digress...

They leave physical sign, so collective hallucination doesn't seem to fit.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

So every experiment of all time needs to be able to be done by everyone, everywhere for it to be valid?! Terrible logic.
Just because you don’t understand Science or experiments doesn’t make it invalid; it simple means youre uneducated.
Btw the way, the fact that you don’t understand how to measure rotation, which is not in MPH but RPM, means you are completely unqualified to have this conversation.
How did you get so confident in your ignorance?

Just to be nitpicky the Earth is about 25k miles in circumference, and completes a rotation in about 24 hours, so it does rotate at about 1k mph at the equator.

@CyberRubberDuck the moon completes a rotation in the same time as it completes an orbit around the earth so the same landscape is always facing the Earth. It is possible to point a laser at a specific point while tracking the Moon and have it reflected back at us.

 

[CyberRubberDuck]

Which you then shifted into
A) it depends on who is running the tests and posting online.
2) it could just be bouncing off the moon
And D) lasers spread so you couldn't read the bounce anyway (then how could you read it bouncing off the moon?)

Extra Credit: you incorrectly tried to drop a little factoid about the earth spinning and how you couldn't lock on to anything anyway.

Also, how's that USSR answer coming? You've had plenty of time to ignore it and then go look on YouTube.

I didn't shift anything. I was simply pointing out why the subject isn't evidence that we went to the moon. And there are numerous points to it.

USSR?
Didn't see anything relating to the USSR. What are you on about? This new look forum is crap at the best of times, nevermind on a mobile phone.
So anywayz how does the USSR support your belief in sci-fi?

 

[Deleted member 577981]

Black Bear is just a lazy way for people to write everything off. They haven't given it much thought if they think black bears can account for most sightings. Any case in which a track is left it can be ruled out immediately, for starters. But I digress...

They leave physical sign, so collective hallucination doesn't seem to fit.

Worse than that man... They haven't even taken in 100 sightings let alone a thousand or more....

You know as well as I do that black bears cannot possibly account for all of the sightings but you can only think that it could if you've never even listened to 50 or 100 of them....

Contempt prior to investigation ensures everlasting ignorance.

You ought to check out that debunking article about Jeff Meldrum posted earlier in the thread. It's amazingly poorly done and dishonest and it's amazing that that is what counts as debunking these days amongst the scientifically-minded crowd. I have serious problems with CT conspiracy stuff and many of the people who follow it and I do think that they sometimes do not reason properly but to blame it all on the CT crowd as if they are stupid when that kind of debunking gets passed off as legitimate by serious people is profoundly hypocritical and naive.

Carl Jumgs notion of mythological manifestation leaves room for physical sign, just so you know.

 

[CyberRubberDuck]

Just to be nitpicky the Earth is about 25k miles in circumference, and completes a rotation in about 24 hours, so it does rotate at about 1k mph at the equator.

@CyberRubberDuck the moon completes a rotation in the same time as it completes an orbit around the earth so the same landscape is always facing the Earth. It is possible to point a laser at a specific point while tracking the Moon and have it reflected back at us.

Just to be nitpicky the Earth is about 25k miles in circumference, and completes a rotation in about 24 hours, so it does rotate at about 1k mph at the equator.

@CyberRubberDuck the moon completes a rotation in the same time as it completes an orbit around the earth so the same landscape is always facing the Earth. It is possible to point a laser at a specific point while tracking the Moon and have it reflected back at us.

Love it when people from the same side correct eachother.

*Why does this dumbass forum keep quoting posts twice.....

 

[LangfordBarrow]

There's lectures, documentaries, tutorials, etc. on YT, for a myriad of subjects.

It's kind of dumb to try and insult someone for learning on a platform full of information.

Yeah but just like in the Last Crusade you must choose wisely. Choose the wrong channel to learn from and you'll shrivel up and end up a pile of dust...

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Love it when people from the same side correct eachother.

*Why does this dumbass forum keep quoting posts twice.....

Don't forget there was a second paragraph in that post. <[analyzed}>

 

[dirtypablo]

It's only silly if your motives are silly themselves. The problem of experts and when to trust experts and when not to and why is one of the main pressing problems right now for our society. It's a significant issue.

Threads like this give a person who's interested in learning, deep insight into the two camps that have lost their way. The first one being science deniers who just knee jerk react and don't trust the system anymore and the other is in those types of people who believe that science and the establishments are the same thing and to blindly follow established thinking without ever really looking into anything.

Personally, I find this question as to how people get so lost and muddled extremely and profoundly interesting as do many thinkers and philosophers today and so if you approach these threads and many others like them with a larger perspective in mind, there is no waste of time whatsoever.

For the most part though, my observation is that when these two groups get so off track it comes down to tribalism and emotionalism. It's not really a problem with thinking. It's a problem with not applying thinking when emotions and false identities overrule that need.

For me nearly no thread is ever about the topic itself. It's always about the social, psychological, emotional, spiritual and intellectual dynamics being played out in the thread.

If you are not caught up in the outcome or in winning or in mocking other people, you can come to learn a great deal about humanity this way.

The fundamental problem with these threads is that the CT posters doesn't know what they don't know, and refuse to admit or acknowledge that as a real possibility. Cyberduck is the perfect example of this - he once went back and forth on here for pages on end arguing with a literal PhD in physics about Newtons 3rd law. He fundamentally didn't understand it and was completely wrong, but was convinced that it was the guy with a Phd in that very subject that didn't understand it, and he refused to acknowledge even the possibility that he was wrong. Nevermind the fact that multiple other posters, many of whom also have degrees in physics or similar technical fields all agreed he didn't know what he was talking about, nope, everyone else is wrong - its not possible there's a depth to the field beyond his trivial understanding.

You see this pattern over and over - guys who have at best a trivial, surface level understanding of a topic, arguing with folks who have a much deeper understanding - the guys with the deeper understanding try to point out the flaws in the thinking/understanding/whatever of the guys with the shallow understanding, but they refuse to acknowledge that they might not know what they're talking about. I think you're a good dude and am always interested in reading your stuff about mediation and spiritual practices, but you frequently do the same thing. In many of the threads on UFO stuff I've tried to explain to you how there's absolutely no rigor in the 'science' being done at places like Skinwalker ranch, but you refuse to acknowledge that you don't really know what would constitute scientific rigor or why its so important. I've pointed out that there are legit scientific organizations seeking to find aliens like SETI, and that those organizations dismiss all of this stuff for that exact reason - there's no rigor to it - its not real science. I've even posted articles from NASA debunking the Fravor videos, and the central theme is that none of those videos can be taken as real evidence of anything because its haphazard data. You did the same thing with the debunking of the bigfoot article - they presented real, valid criticisms of his work, specifically focusing on both the lack of rigor and the common elements of pseudoscience like going outside your field of expertise that were present in his work. You don't understand the degree to which eye witness accounts can easily be manipulated, or how that's an entirely different branch of science and should be treated as such, and thus don't understand why it's so important to have someone well versed in that topic generating and evaluating a dataset of eyewitness accounts. I'll acknowledge that you do often admit to not knowing much about certain subjects which is more than I can say for many of the other posters with similar positions, but when it comes to having your views challenged you very frequently do the same thing - refuse to admit that you might be wrong or don't fully understand what is being pointed to.

These threads are certainly fun and amusing real life demonstrations of the dunning kruger effect, but I'm not sure what else there is to be learned here.

 

[CyberRubberDuck]

Don't forget there was a second paragraph in that post. <[analyzed}>

Yes but it didn't state anything I don't already know is claimed. Stating it again doesn't give it any more validity. It's all just "in theory......".
Yes I agree in theory of course it's 'possible'. But there is far too much room for error to make it even slightly likely.
Plus that chump earlier failed to respond to my point about the laser beam that is sent from Earth to the moon spreads out over a large area, resulting in a huge loss of signal strength. By the time the beam reaches the moon and reflects back, it is extremely weak. This can make it challenging to detect and measure it accurately, especially over long distances.
He simply wants to believe it's not true and just ignore it.

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

Don't forget there was a second paragraph in that post. <[analyzed}>

He's proven himself time and again to be trolling. Don't feed him.