We must always work locally of course, and many will. But the big ideas, the thinking that will change human consciousness needs a big platform where the big thinkers can discuss and disseminate new thought that filters out and beyond and into the local.
Speak loudly we’re not done yet.
Flat Earth was amusing when people thought it was some internet gag. Then debating began as light entertainment. Then the globe believers got their asses whipped.
We’ve done our homework and we know the science better than you.
Then we kept on trying to say wake up everyone you’ve been lied to. The Earth cannot be what they’ve told us.
Everybody laughed and looked blank with a fluoride stare.
We were stealing the noise and they had Trump and Brexit to fight about after all.
Stop laughing. Pay attention.
This Earth is not what you think.
So you want to argue the point? Go and look, really look. Learn the facts and study the science.
We only came to this because we were sceptical too.
We are not pushing flat Earth…. we are seeking truth.
NASA scientists have discovered that two plus two now equals five.
This incredible discovery has been peer reviewed and tested by Physicists at Harvard University who said they had to agree by George. Spokesperson for the NASA team, Don Pettit, one of the “Science Guys” said in a statement to press in attendance: “Um… it seems we have been wrong until now! Umm…yep golly! ”
Calculations performed on the Harvard Physics Department’s very impressive “Particle Computer System” known as ‘MAX’ confirmed the fantastic discovery and everyone else in the department jumped up and down with glee as new funding was guaranteed.
Pettit added that they would use the new result to “Do more science! Yeah!” and somebody behind him laughed. Updates soon.
I do not follow paradigms I question them, I am a philosopher. I do not believe in things uncritically, I am a scientist.
Any concept of a pressurised gas existing adjacent to a hard vacuum is going to run into problems logically within the principles of the second law of thermodynamics which forbids this happening – unless a barrier or container separates and contains that gas. This precludes even the notion of a ‘pressure gradient’ existing without a barrier against the hard vacuum. Logically and in physics, the earth cannot hold a pressurised gaseous atmosphere even with gravity as the atmosphere would have long ago been instantly and violently ripped away to the depths of the vast void we are supposedly surrounded by. Of course the science fan boys cannot pull themselves away from gravity for five seconds to understand this anomaly and it conveniently gets glossed over (like most other aspects of “gravity” – like that fact that it’s just a mathematical formulation of fall rate on Earth and never been empirically or scientifically proven as a cause of this falling effect we see).
Consider belief in authority and how we live under deception. Consider mainstream media and how it propagates deception. Consider economic rationality and how we live under that as deception. Consider how the legal and justice systems we live under operate through systematic deception. Consider the corporate world and the deceptions we face daily. Consider religion, education, science, and most other human institutions, and consider deception as intrinsic.
You see, the Earth looks and feels obviously flat and stationary – because it is. It is not I who hold the cult beliefs. That would be this bizarre belief system of a ball Earth going around and around in “space:” You got it exactly backwards my friend.
In logic: that some science is useful and beneficial to humans does not imply that all science is useful and beneficial.
Science is not and cannot be conflated with technology. Science is a method and an institution. It may use technology or be instrumental in invention and development of technology. But it is not and cannot BE technology. Your argument asserting validity of all science because it was responsible for devising some principles of light and optics through lenses is NOT an argument which can be used reasonably or logically to support ALL science and ALL of its subsequent developments.
Ethics in science and the politicisation and corporatism of science as an institution MUST now be factored in any rational discourse on the state of modern science.