"...everything we are told is complete bollocks and it always has been!"
Everything except this, right?
😂
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
"...everything we are told is complete bollocks and it always has been!"
Everything except this, right?
😂
Now imagine if you specifically refuted a single thing I've just said in my last two posts?
Just one.
Then apply that same level of research to the crap you are being programmed with.
I don't mean to attempt refute, just to amuse myself mostly and to engage in discourse.
What programming do you mean?
Almost all of it - from birth on, it's nearly all programming - under the guise of news, or tv, or education, or entertainment, or religion, or science, or society. It's programming because it isn't actually true, but people are too dumbed down to question it.
100 years ago people were wearing masks for a flu pandemic. There were shown to be not only ineffective, but dangerous. Now people don't even bother to study history and it is all being rewritten as we speak...
"...it isn't actually true..."
I couldn't agree more, though I think we may have subtle epistemological differences in worldview.
I think it isn't true because I'm a nihilist and I'm unconvinced that our senses, instruments, or reasoning can even ascertain the objective noumenal reality.
Essentially I think true-ness is far more elusive than it's treatment in common parlance, perhaps to the point of being completely inaccessible. Basic examples of what I mean can be found in questions of determinism in ethics, the hard problem of consciousness, and the problem of induction in science.
Here is another external link to a much shorter paper (with much less math) that deconstructs the idea of knowledge as justified true belief.
Though Gettier treats truth as ascertainable, he does demonstrate the trickiness of knowing which seems to me deeply related to issues of truth.
You do realise it is possible to just start with the basics and find real world evidence?
For example, when I have visited a particular glacier three times over the past 25 years and taken photos of it, I have real world evidence of it getting much bigger which indicates the temperature is cooling.
And when I see "news" reports saying that the very same glacier is melting, but they are reversing the order of their photos, that is evidence of another kind.
And when people avoid refuting any statements I make by talking in circles around the subjects, that is revealing a lot as well
I suspect your series of photographs is in no way a precise measurement, unless you happen to be employing surveying techniques.
Whatever the case, even were it an exercise in geometry, that is not an indication of temperature. At best it could be a correlate, because the glacial systems are governed by far more than just temperature. For instance they move through gravity alone without need for the intercession of temperature change.
A motion could easily be perceived as a change in size, and such motion may well be visible over a 25 year span.
Also I'm less interested in exploring the simple direct facts of your assertions than the attitudes and axioms that surround them, hence my tangential approach.
We could go back and forth simply contradicting each other, but that doesn't seem so amusing or illuminating to me as a dialectic analysis of the philosophy these propositions are swimming in.
Holy cow, can you avoid addressing facts better than anyone in the universe?
My series of photos does not need precise measurements, we are talking hundreds of meters here, not a few centimetres!
I live next to the sea. The high tide mark has dropped over the past 100 years...
But I guess that is just an artificial perception of meaningless marks on rocks...