Flat earth conspiracy spreads globally

[kellyb]

To believe in flat earth in this century requires you to believe in a massive conspiracy theory. You have to believe that anyone involved in the aerospace industry is involved. Anyone who has traveled to Antarctica. It also requires a lot of willful ignorance.

You'd think it requires belief that everyone in the air travel biz is in on it, but they really haven't even gotten that far in their thinking, judging from the one I deconverted. When I talked him out of chemtrails, I was the one who had to convince HIM that that a global pilot conspiracy was a necessary part of how that would have to work. He's never even had the thought!

The idea that they can think things through for themselves, completely on their own, is just totally alien to them. Nobody ever told them they had not just permission, but a DUTY as a sentient human being and a citizen in a participatory Western democracy to actually just think for themselves. They're fixated on "freedom" without realizing the the handcuffs are ones they put on themselves in their mind, and that they need to just grow some balls, be an adult, use logic and well-vetted evidence to the best of their ability, and come to their own conclusion.

I'd like to note that one of the best proofs of globe earth is simply the photographs we have of the earth from space. These are perfectly valid forms of evidence and simply declaring them to be fake is not a good faith argument. You either have to declare them fake or concede that the world is round as shown by the photos. But simply not accepting that goes against what you want to believe doesn't make the evidence any less valid.

They really think the pics could be faked. It is a good faith argument. They sincerely believe it's possible or probable that the pics are bogus.

I mean, the pics could be faked if we're all just at the mercy of just believing the word of NASA. Luckily, we're not.

 

[Puppycow]

They really think the pics could be faked. It is a good faith argument. They sincerely believe it's possible or probable that the pics are bogus.

I mean, the pics could be faked if we're all just at the mercy of just believing the word of NASA. Luckily, we're not.

I rather doubt that it's a good faith argument rather than a convenient way to hand-wave away conclusive proof against their theory. Your friend, who you convinced (and good on you, btw), was maybe "flat-earth-curious" at the time, but it doesn't sound to me like he had completely made up his mind about the issue. Maybe it's easier to convince someone who you know in real life than a stranger on the internet.

I'm well satisfied in my own thinking that I haven't merely accepted the word of an authority figure that the earth is round, but know of multiple ways to prove, and I have experiences such as flying across the Pacific Ocean that would not be consistent with their idea of a giant dome like in The Truman Show. The time of day on one side is clearly different from on the other side, and you need to reset your watch (if you have an old-fashioned one) when you get to the other side. Further, massive fakery of the sort that would be necessary to fool most of the people besides a few clever flat-earthers simply isn't feasible. No-one is that all-powerful. Not NASA, not the government. There are many other ways to prove it, of course, but I don't think that to be "a good skeptic" like Carl Sagan, who I very much admire, it's necessary to personally go into space to be sure that those photos aren't fake. And while it is possible with modern technology to make a fake photo, it would take far more than that to pull it all off.

So, what am I saying here, exactly? I think if one really thinks about it, it's many orders of magnitude harder to believe that all of those photos of the earth are fake, because of the massive conspiracy that would be necessary to pull that off, and all the people "in the know" who would have to keep it a secret, than to simply accept that these are legitimate photos.

 

[trustbutverify]

The idea that NASA would produce fake photos from fake orbit to scam the human population into abandoning their common sense so as to be more easily controlled is absurd on it's face. The only people who would buy such drivel are those for who(m?) rational thought itself is an elitist crime. I wonder what else these heroes of free thought can be convinced of... and how many innocent people might end up as their victims.

 

[Craig4]

The definition of a secret is something only one person knows.

 

[Porpoise of Life]

they need to just grow some balls, be an adult, use logic and well-vetted evidence to the best of their ability

Now why is that sound advice when coming from you, but sadistic hedonistic psychopathic hate speech coming from someone like Joe?

 

[kellyb]

Now why is that sound advice when coming from you, but sadistic hedonistic psychopathic hate speech coming from someone like Joe?

Because I'm really delicate in the way I encourage them to take a leap of faith in themselves when I say it to them. I say it in an encouraging way, where my intent is clearly just to inspire them to be brave and to have faith in themselves.

I'm also explaining at the same time that there's no shortcut to figuring things out quickly, either. It takes time, dedication, and some intellectual rigor with some things.

At no point do I bully them. Their feedback is that I just come across "a tad preachy" (was what I heard most recently.)

 

[kellyb]

I rather doubt that it's a good faith argument rather than a convenient way to hand-wave away conclusive proof against their theory. Your friend, who you convinced (and good on you, btw), was maybe "flat-earth-curious" at the time, but it doesn't sound to me like he had completely made up his mind about the issue. Maybe it's easier to convince someone who you know in real life than a stranger on the internet.

My IRL friend had recently been a chemtrails actual true believer, but yeah, he was more flirting with the flat earth stuff.

I'm really good at "deconverting" strangers online, too. I have a whole method which nobody here would be interested in, based on the communications science methods the CDC and WHO communications experts use to get people to trust them when necessary. It involves enthusiastically validating anything they've noticed that seems weird to them, that they're right about, with something controversial. It demonstrates to them that I'm not some nefarious butthole out to "hide the truth" from anyone. It gives me an "in".

I'm well satisfied in my own thinking that I haven't merely accepted the word of an authority figure that the earth is round, but know of multiple ways to prove, and I have experiences such as flying across the Pacific Ocean that would not be consistent with their idea of a giant dome like in The Truman Show. The time of day on one side is clearly different from on the other side, and you need to reset your watch (if you have an old-fashioned one) when you get to the other side. Further, massive fakery of the sort that would be necessary to fool most of the people besides a few clever flat-earthers simply isn't feasible. No-one is that all-powerful. Not NASA, not the government. There are many other ways to prove it, of course, but I don't think that to be "a good skeptic" like Carl Sagan, who I very much admire, it's necessary to personally go into space to be sure that those photos aren't fake. And while it is possible with modern technology to make a fake photo, it would take far more than that to pull it all off.

What I do, and what Sagan (I am SURE) would have advocated is just talking them through that "multiple ways to prove it" stuff. Sagan would have vehemently opposed just trying to get people to believe that the pictures are real.

Also, Sagan never went into space himself. He wasn't an astronaut. He believed the photos were real because of other reasons involving logic and knowledge.

So, what am I saying here, exactly? I think if one really thinks about it, it's many orders of magnitude harder to believe that all of those photos of the earth are fake, because of the massive conspiracy that would be necessary to pull that off, and all the people "in the know" who would have to keep it a secret, than to simply accept that these are legitimate photos.

Of course! But when you say "when one really thinks about it" you're referring to "one" who has figured out HOW to think. They have to be shown how to locate evidence and facts they know beyond a shadow of a doubt reflect reality, and then process that information through logical "If, then" thinking (which is the core of the scientific method.)

 

[Lothian]

 

[DuvalHMFIC]

Yeah, everyone knows Pluto isn't a planet

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

My IRL friend had recently been a chemtrails actual true believer, but yeah, he was more flirting with the flat earth stuff.

I'm really good at "deconverting" strangers online, too. I have a whole method which nobody here would be interested in, based on the communications science methods the CDC and WHO communications experts use to get people to trust them when necessary. It involves enthusiastically validating anything they've noticed that seems weird to them, that they're right about, with something controversial. It demonstrates to them that I'm not some nefarious butthole out to "hide the truth" from anyone. It gives me an "in".



What I do, and what Sagan (I am SURE) would have advocated is just talking them through that "multiple ways to prove it" stuff. Sagan would have vehemently opposed just trying to get people to believe that the pictures are real.

Also, Sagan never went into space himself. He wasn't an astronaut. He believed the photos were real because of other reasons involving logic and knowledge.




Of course! But when you say "when one really thinks about it" you're referring to "one" who has figured out HOW to think. They have to be shown how to locate evidence and facts they know beyond a shadow of a doubt reflect reality, and then process that information through logical "If, then" thinking (which is the core of the scientific method.)

Assumes a fact not in evidence.

 

[Hellbound]

Assumes a fact not in evidence.

The six-word story of the last few pages in this thread

 

[trustbutverify]

I'm really good at "deconverting" strangers online, too. I have a whole method which nobody here would be interested in, based on the communications science methods the CDC and WHO communications experts use to get people to trust them when necessary. It involves enthusiastically validating anything they've noticed that seems weird to them, that they're right about, with something controversial. It demonstrates to them that I'm not some nefarious butthole out to "hide the truth" from anyone. It gives me an "in".

Well, I'd be interested in a method that reliably converts gravity deniers into rational human beings. I might even be able to pick up some pointers. Could you provide a few JREF/ISF links where you successively employed this method on some hardcore conspiracy warriors?

 

[bknight]

Well, I'd be interested in a method that reliably converts gravity deniers into rational human beings. I might even be able to pick up some pointers. Could you provide a few JREF/ISF links where you successively employed this method on some hardcore conspiracy warriors?

In my experience, I have never seen a hard core CT being brought back into the light.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Oh goodie another "patented debate style."

 

[Hellbound]

Oh goodie another "patented debate style."

As long as it's not proof of immortality, I think we can make it

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

In my experience, I have never seen a hard core CT being brought back into the light.

The only person I know who has been persuaded to turn from the dark side is me. I was once a firm believer in UFOs and ESP and had doubts about JFK's demise.

But no more.

I have been able to bring a few people to a greater understanding on a few CT issues. Usually by application of the Socratic method.

 

[trustbutverify]

The only person I know who has been persuaded to turn from the dark side is me. I was once a firm believer in UFOs and ESP and had doubts about JFK's demise.

But no more.

I have been able to bring a few people to a greater understanding on a few CT issues. Usually by application of the Socratic method.

That's what I always try... pointing out the objective self-contradictions within the claims. Seems to have no effect on the gangsta CT'ers, at least not in my clumsy hands. Haven't attempted the Trojan Horse method though. Patronizing ridiculous claims is tough for me.

 

[DuvalHMFIC]

The only person I know who has been persuaded to turn from the dark side is me. I was once a firm believer in UFOs and ESP and had doubts about JFK's demise.

But no more.

I have been able to bring a few people to a greater understanding on a few CT issues. Usually by application of the Socratic method.

Me, too. Back in the late 90s and early 2000s I was a big listener of Art Bell, read UFOlogy books, and even watched one of Alex Jones's videos (sometimes shortly after 9/11). I was sorta young and dumb then.

It was learning about Occam's Razor that really showed me the light, to be honest. That, and the fact that I NEVER believed in psychics, the topic that drew me towards skepticism in the first place.

 

[p0lka]

I find it quite funny to get a flat earther to stop saying what it's not, but to say what it is. i.e. what is the flat earth model? ... Hilarity ensues.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I'm just noting that it has nothing to do with skepticism. It's online hate group mob behavior with absolutely no socially useful function, and it does demonstrable harm.

If you want to see a real online hate group mob behavior with absolutely no socially useful function, go and read the comments that the Flat Earthers make about people that dare to stand up and say that they are wrong.