Andy Paquette, Precognitive Dreams |583|

Quite a strange response. I said we need to stop putting emotion into beliefs about reality and you reply no, then delve into how you need logic and reason.

You don't HAVE to suffer fools gladly and you don't HAVE to entertain flat earth. You also don't have to get emotional and pissed off about it. Reactions are a choice and I'm not sure why anyone would consciously pick a response of negative emotion over another option.. such as laughing it off.
what about:
flexibility, openness, love and trust are awesome parts of the human experience... and they are central to all my big picture questions/answers...

Didn't say "have to" said "need a place"

I'm definitely ok with laughing at all... thought you were somewhat serious about being a flat earther... or a spherically neutral person [[p]] no worries.
 
Alex, I think that it is more probable that we have a plane above us, and a plane below us. Furthermore, I think the limits of this structure are quite obvious. For one, why is it that the horizon always is flat? What is this shit? It should have some kind of curvature to it if we live on a ball, but it doesn't.

Noted [[p]]
 

This is puzzling to me. I was always that smart kid that told everybody that "people used to think the earth is flat." However, if you look at this kind of shit, it makes no sense whatsoever when you try to integrate it with what we were taught. Certainly, the problem compounds when you look at the amount of media that seemingly forces us to believe that we live on a ball. Is it possible that we live on a stationary plane? Certainly, earthquakes would posit otherwise.
 
Can't we test the fucking curvature out? How hard can this be? For one, the flat earthers say that water is always level, but we know that is bullshit. Water droplets exist. They aren't level. We can throw some water on the counter and see that they have curvature to them. Nevertheless, this does not discount the fact that the fucking horizon, and by that, we mean the line between the land and sky, somehow remains flat no matter what altitude we raise to. This is demonstrable shit.
 
Seems sailors have seen the effects of curvature from sea level for centuries. When watching a ship come into visual view on the horizon of an ocean, the ship appears mast first, then superstructure, then finally the hull. I mean what are we talking about here?
 
Seems sailors have seen the effects of curvature from sea level for centuries. When watching a ship come into visual view on the horizon of an ocean, the ship appears mast first, then superstructure, then finally the hull. I mean what are we talking about here?

Indeed. And even if on a clear day one went up a hill with an uninterrupted view, one wouldn't even have a horizon on a flat Earth. The view would just continue uninterrupted with no horizon until things became hazy. That's not what we see though.
 

I used to consider not thinking the Earth was a sphere was a litmus test for taking that person seriously whatsoever. But when interacting with such individuals, I notice they sometimes say brilliant things and in metaphorical ways that stick in the mind.

I think the more poetically-minded are especially prone to Flat Earth thinking. They conflate things like NASA lying having something to do with the shape of the Earth.
And technically what is the essence of poetry but conflation / metaphor?
 
I used to consider not thinking the Earth was a sphere was a litmus test for taking that person seriously whatsoever. But when interacting with such individuals, I notice they sometimes say brilliant things and in metaphorical ways that stick in the mind.

I think the more poetically-minded are especially prone to Flat Earth thinking. They conflate things like NASA lying having something to do with the shape of the Earth.
And technically what is the essence of poetry but conflation / metaphor?

Agree. My biggest issue with the flat earth model isn’t even the science, which I’m perfectly satisfied does in fact demonstrate that the Earth is a sphere. It lies in what would need to be the sheer size of the conspiracy. Some people act is if a United States based space agency have the only people in the world who have seen views of the shape of the Earth from a distance. When in fact multiple numbers of countries have sent scores of people up into space (including a growing number of private citizens) and even more have produced and have access to satellite images as well, again, BOTH in the governmental and private sectors.

Given that if the Earth was flat, that it would be unquestionably the greatest secret ever kept in the history of man, it’s remarkable that all of these people have been able to keep quiet about it. Can you imagine how great the urge to spill the beans on this enormous secret would be? Not one whistleblower? Not even on a deathbed? Not even anonymously? As space travel and even high altitude more traditional aircraft travel becomes more and more common and available to private citizens, this flat earth thing will totally die out. But if you think about it, it’s already reached the point where it should be long dead, of course.

But of course at that point a new layer of conspiracy will have been added to accommodate this at some point such as, “well sure, a lot of people have seen proof for themselves that the Earth is flat, but theyve probably had their families directly threatened by Illuminati lizard people if they should say anything. So we shouldnt be surprised that they havent blown the whistle on it.”
 
Seems sailors have seen the effects of curvature from sea level for centuries. When watching a ship come into visual view on the horizon of an ocean, the ship appears mast first, then superstructure, then finally the hull. I mean what are we talking about here?
This is rudimentary observations that has been proven wrong many times over. Go watch a shit go over the so called curve, get a a telescope, and you can zoom in on it. Have you not heard of this? This is the equivalent of saying that street lights, at a distance, go underneath the curve of the street at a distance. They appear to do so, but this has to do with perspective. Likewise, when you stand in a long hall, and you see the roof get narrower at the other end, do you think that has to do with the curve of the fucking earth?
 
what about:
flexibility, openness, love and trust are awesome parts of the human experience... and they are central to all my big picture questions/answers...

Didn't say "have to" said "need a place"

I'm definitely ok with laughing at all... thought you were somewhat serious about being a flat earther... or a spherically neutral person [[p]] no worries.

My deepest held belief is that we should not have deeply held beliefs
But also no, I'm definitely not a flat earther lol
 
I used to consider not thinking the Earth was a sphere was a litmus test for taking that person seriously

That still works for me [[p]]

Then again, I'm a flat Earther... at least in the spirit of what we're talking about. I mean, I have held on to things that were provably wrong... I've been hard-headed... willfully ignorant... and Stuck on Stupid. so, I've had to take my intellectual/ scientific/ logic-reason-based whippings... and I'm better for it.

IMO being condescending doesn't help. telling someone you think they're right when you don't think they're right is a non-starter. sure, you don't have to do a victory dance on their head when you prove them wrong, but you have to be willing to take your best shot at proving them wrong.

not everyone's opinion is equally valid. not everyone's experience conforms to the consensus reality in a way that's useful to the rest of us [[p]]

Also, I'm super glad that I've gone down the Flat Earther rabbit hole... not to be confused with the Flat Earth science rabbit hole which is a waste of time.

the Flat Earther rabbit hole is the why people believe weird things rabbit hole. it's the Holocaust denial rabbit hole. it's the " no rabies no virus " rabbit hole. it's the " Consciousness is an illusion rabbit hole". it's the UFOs are " unidentified " rabbit hole.

these rabbit holes are not the exclusive territory of retards. they are the spaces we all occupy to one degree or another. I enjoy the process of pulling myself out of my rabbit holes... part of that process is offering to pull others out of theirs [[p]]
 
Last edited:
Yes. So an extreme example of this would be re the shape of the planet. Do ardent disc Earth adherents really live on a disc in "their reality"?

I don't think they do. I think they just have a mistaken belief and maybe there are things in their personal vicinity that manifest, giving them the further impression that the entire world is flat. But I very much doubt Idealism is completely powerful. It seems there are limits

I see. I think this is an example of something being taken too literally and/or extrapolated too far.

I'll give some examples. Imagine you work somewhere in which you deal with the same people on a pretty regular basis. One is a grumpy old man you can't stand interacting with. You think things like "I hope he goes to another coworker", "oh great I am NOT looking forward to dealing with HIM today", and "he's such a miserable dick". It's never pleasant, it's awkward, never goes well, etc. But then imagine you "look" at it different and think "well maybe he lost his whole family by now", "maybe he's lonely", and "maybe life has really screwed him over", so you then start thinking those things when interacting with him and three months later, he cracks jokes with you and you enjoy seeing him. - The way you look at the situation changed the situation.

However, no matter what you tell yourself and no matter how you look at it, a dog crate will never suddenly BE a beanbag chair.

Or another; you can look at your childhood and say you were neglected and feel terrible about it, or you can look at it and say "my parents did the best they thought they could with what they had" and your feelings on it may change entirely.

It's just like the observer effect; it isn't the looking that changes things, it's the interaction. You can't change what physically IS just because you want it to change or believe it to be different than it is.
 
That still works for me [[p]]

Then again, I'm a flat Earther... at least in the spirit of what we're talking about. I mean, I have held on to things that were provably wrong... I've been hard-headed... willfully ignorant... and Stuck on Stupid. so, I've had to take my intellectual/ scientific/ logic-reason-based whippings... and I'm better for it.

IMO being condescending doesn't help. telling someone you think they're right when you don't think they're right is a non-starter. sure, you don't have to do a victory dance on their head when you prove them wrong, but you have to be willing to take your best shot at proving them wrong.

not everyone's opinion is equally valid. not everyone's experience conforms to the consensus reality in a way that's useful to the rest of us [[p]]

Also, I'm super glad that I've gone down the Flat Earther rabbit hole... not to be confused with the Flat Earth science rabbit hole which is a waste of time.

the Flat Earther rabbit hole is the why people believe weird things rabbit hole. it's the Holocaust denial rabbit hole. it's the " no rabies no virus " rabbit hole. it's the " Consciousness is an illusion rabbit hole". it's the UFOs are " unidentified " rabbit hole.

these rabbit holes are not the exclusive territory of retards. they are the spaces we all occupy to one degree or another. I enjoy the process of pulling myself out of my rabbit holes... part of that process is offering to pull others out of theirs [[p]]

I agree with most of what you wrote. You describe many things so well! But there are a couple of points I'd like to clarify. So you still don't take a person seriously if they don't pass a litmus test? / if they believe something weird?
- even though you've admittedly had a flat earther mentality yourself sometimes?
But if others were then to have not taken you seriously and unsubscribed, then skeptiko wouldn't have even gotten off the ground!
 
PS I'm starting to think that many who are stuck in the flat earth mentality are wired in a different way so to speak. Even though I respect them as individuals and many of their opinions, I'm starting to doubt that they can understand that the Earth is a sphere. Their minds seem to work too allegorically and metaphorically for that. I'm thinking of SnakeTurbanHead and Robbe here.

And on the virus/no virus issue, which is a step up in difficulty to use logic and not so easy to test for oneself... By calling people who doubt viruses "fools", and calling it "silliness" comes across as condescending. It doesn't further the conversation as far as I can tell
 
- even though you've admittedly had a flat earther mentality yourself sometimes?

Haha... you'ed zeroed in on a paradox... but, I don't think it can be otherwise. I can only come at this stuff from where I am are at... and I have to take my lumps when I'm proven wrong.

But if others were then to have not taken you seriously and unsubscribed, then skeptiko wouldn't have even gotten off the ground!

First off, that has happened like a million times... people subscribe, unsubscribe, resubscribe... it happens all the time. secondly, skeptiko hasn't exactly "gotten off the ground" in terms of popularity... it's not super popular... and it rubs a lot of people the wrong way. I'm not trying to drive people away but I sure as heck don't see any reason to change my path in order to " attract more listeners ."

what it really comes down to for me is process. how do I seek truth? how do we deal with deceptive elements? how do we apply discernment?
 
PS I'm starting to think that many who are stuck in the flat earth mentality are wired in a different way so to speak. Even though I respect them as individuals and many of their opinions, I'm starting to doubt that they can understand that the Earth is a sphere. Their minds seem to work too allegorically and metaphorically for that. I'm thinking of SnakeTurbanHead and Robbe here.

For all the reasons I stated above I don't think this is so. on a very personal basis I understand how I can get into a headspace where I believe weird things. for me, it has sometimes been soothing/comforting to believe weird things... particularly when the alternative was scary/ unsettling/ Paradigm shattering. I'm talking about my personal experience, but it seems to be common to a lot of us.

And on the virus/no virus issue, which is a step up in difficulty to use logic and not so easy to test for oneself... By calling people who doubt viruses "fools", and calling it "silliness" comes across as condescending. It doesn't further the conversation as far as I can tell

- I don't think it's a very big step up. to suggest that the entire field of virology is and has always been a complete and total scam is pretty Flat Earthy. but it does have a different feel to it... more akin to Holocaust denial.

- I know I have referenced the " don't suffer fools gladly" thing a lot, and I understand this sometimes riles people, but it points to something important... IE some ideas are foolish.

of course, this gets tricky when it comes to censorship. but I think we've arrived at a good place re this on Skeptiko... if you want to promote a "foolish" idea then find a worthwhile guest to support your idea and I'll bring them on skeptiko.

Maybe you're right... maybe I'm "foolish"... but maybe you're wrong... maybe you're " foolish." I have respect for those who are willing to engage in the process [[p]]
 
I don't know how to do that fancy quote the previous comment box, so I'll go oldschool on this reply.

"I don't think it's a very big step up. to suggest that the entire field of virology is and has always been a complete and total scam is pretty Flat Earthy. but it does have a different feel to it... more akin to Holocaust denial."

I'm curious if you know the definition of "theory" vs "law" when it comes to science. Laws of thermodynamics are proven. Germ theory has not been proven. I'm not an all out denier of viruses because, as I've said before, I don't believe in having firmly held beliefs; I have ideas. That said, I do have questions that seem, to me, to be quite logical and should be easily explained, but aren't. Instead, when I bring certain things up, the response is anger. To me, an angry reaction signals an emotional response to feeling threatened in some way by what I am asking or saying. For example: if rabies is a virus that spreads through a bite, why can we not find the virus in saliva and show it in a microscope? Why do we have to cut the head off and inspect the brain; essentially diagnosing through evidence of EFFECT and not CAUSE. Theories, my dude, SHOULD BE questioned until they are PROVEN LAWS.

"of course, this gets tricky when it comes to censorship. but I think we've arrived at a good place re this on Skeptiko..."

Gotta disagree since SnakeTurbanHead was banned because "not sure where you're going with this" as the reason, with multiple odd spelling errors. If that wasn't you, maybe you need to take a better look at your admins.

"Maybe you're right... maybe I'm "foolish"... but maybe you're wrong... maybe you're " foolish." I have respect for those who are willing to engage in the process"

Either way, I have to agree with Nelson. Devolving into name calling because you think something is silly can only ever be insulting and never helpful. And frankly, if you honestly did have respect for people who are willing to engage in the process, I doubt you'd be verbally crapping on them for trying to figure out the truth. That's quite incongruent.
 
Last edited:
I'm not an all out denier of viruses...

Ok... how would you answer these three questions?

======================================

jefreeg said:
the claim was that in certain illnesses, no entity that was pathogenic and self replicating could be isolated, leaving no other variables, from the fluids of a sick person. Which leaves the possibility that some reason other than viruses has been overlooked in assessing what causes certain illnesses.

====
In what cases have virsuses been isolated as the cause of the illness?

Was a virus isolated in rabies?

Is a virus the cause of rabies?
 
In what cases have virsuses been isolated as the cause of the illness?
A: I'm not a scientist nor a virologist, so I can't give you a list. But as an example, HIV is a virus said to be spread by saliva and blood and can be tested in both.

Can you answer a single question of mine? Why can't rabies be found in saliva if that is how it is spread?

Was a virus isolated in rabies?

A: Supposedly, yeah. And supposedly from saliva. But again- if it can be found that way, why are we cutting off heads, opening up the skull, and looking for antigen evidence instead?

Is a virus the cause of rabies?

A: Again, supposedly.


So, keeping in mind that the flu used to kill people in mass amounts until we figured out things like hygiene, think deeply about the vaccines for rabies. It was developed in 1885 when we were finally STARTING to think about things like germs and just starting to really get into things like hand washing for sanitation. The guy decided the vaccines worked because not everyone who was bit by a rabid animal died, and everyone agreed. Is it possible this WASN'T because of the vaccine and was actually a combination of placebo effect and better wound sanitation?
 
Can you answer a single question of mine? Why can't rabies be found in saliva if that is how it is spread?

what do you make of:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30226803/#:~:text=Rabies virus is shed in,in the US each year.

Isolation of Rabies Virus from the Salivary Glands of Wild and Domestic Carnivores during a Skunk Rabies Epizootic
Isabel Jimenez 1, Terry Spraker 2, Jessica Anderson 3, Richard Bowen 3, Amy Gilbert 4
Affiliations expand
Abstract
Rabies is a fatal zoonotic disease of global importance. Rabies virus is shed in the saliva of infected hosts and is primarily transmitted through bite contact. Canine rabies has been eliminated from the US, but wildlife constitutes more than 90% of the reported cases of animal rabies in the US each year.
 
Back
Top