Derek Lambert, Mythicists, Atheists and True Believers |506|

#2
Seems to me the guy sidestepped Alex's inquiries. Pleading something like
'I don't know because i have not done the research '
The word that comes to mind is Agnostic. Something like - i hold no conclusive position.
Or talking without actually saying anything.

Or maybe he just did not want to get into it with Alex?

As to the final question if he does come back to know something about Max Planck and others , the 'double slit' would be useful ..not being sarcastic, I THOUGHT EVERYBODY KNEW THAT! Really i did.
(In the end, I guess i just don't have a opinion)
 
Last edited:
#4
Seems to me the guy sidestepped Alex's inquiries. Pleading something like
'I don't know because i have not done the research '
The word that comes to mind is Agnostic. Something like - i hold no conclusive position.
Or talking without actually saying anything.

Or maybe he just did not want to get into it with Alex?

As to the final question if he does come back to know something about Max Planck and others , the 'double slit' would be useful ..not being sarcastic, I THOUGHT EVERYBODY KNEW THAT! Really i did.
(In the end, I guess i just don't have a opinion)
I thought Derek held an honorable stance. I side with Derek in his line of skepticism. I can't vouch for whether or how genuine it is, but I think I could back up some of his points.

Derek Side Stepping
Derek was up front about his particular lens of scrutiny and skepticism. I hear Derek reaching for the highest standard of labeling anything "evidence". Alex responded something like "so say the Flat Earther's".. But the Flat Earther's are right in the regard that Nobody has yet found it necessary to dedicate the money required to perform a cutting-edge end-all Explain-Like-I'm-A-Flat-Earther Round Earth demonstration. And it's much easier and less expensive (money and bandwidth) to just refer to them as "lower-level skeptics"..

NDE's Proof
Where the "proof" that Near Death Experiencers aren't drawing all their NDE experience/knowledge from The Ether while alive? Or perhaps just as our dreams supposedly occur in the final seconds upon awakening... Why wouldn't we assume NDE's do the same? Not to mention how about a combination of the two?

Double Slit
((singing)) My neuron bone's connected to my | plasma bone.. My plasma bone's connected to my | flesh bone... My flesh bone's connected to the | atmosphere bone.. The atmosphere is connected to the | everything else in the universe......
Point being: Everything's connected.. So me aiming my attention and affecting something doesn't prove an extra-mortal consciousness.


I believe there's a higher plane somewhere, but I think who/whatever programmed this simulation didn't include proof of the higher plane.

 
Last edited:
#5
I kind of identify with these X Christian people, but in a different way. First of all, the doubts and questions they had in adulthood, I had at 8 years old. Second of all, I think that a lot of them do not simply see that they have transferred their faith from Christianity to "Science." They don't recognize that this is really not a paradigm shift. The only thing you did is switch from Nike to Reebok.
 
#6
I thought Derek held an honorable stance. I side with Derek in his line of skepticism. I can't vouch for whether or how genuine it is, but I think I could back up some of his points.

Derek Side Stepping
Derek was up front about his particular lens of scrutiny and skepticism. I hear Derek reaching for the highest standard of labeling anything "evidence". Alex responded something like "so say the Flat Earther's".. But the Flat Earther's are right in the regard that Nobody has yet found it necessary to dedicate the money required to perform a cutting-edge end-all Explain-Like-I'm-A-Flat-Earther Round Earth demonstration. And it's much easier and less expensive (money and bandwidth) to just refer to them as "lower-level skeptics"..

NDE's Proof
Where the "proof" that Near Death Experiencers aren't drawing all their NDE experience/knowledge from The Ether while alive? Or perhaps just as our dreams supposedly occur in the final seconds upon awakening... Why wouldn't we assume NDE's do the same? Not to mention how about a combination of the two?

Double Slit
((singing)) My neuron bone's connected to my | plasma bone.. My plasma bone's connected to my | flesh bone... My flesh bone's connected to the | atmosphere bone.. The atmosphere is connected to the | everything else in the universe......
Point being: Everything's connected.. So me aiming my attention and affecting something doesn't prove an extra-mortal consciousness.


I believe there's a higher plane somewhere, but I think who/whatever programmed this simulation didn't include proof of the higher plane.

I think that Derek recently woke up from the spell of organized religion, one of which is called "Christianity," but he is addicted to a new religion called "Science." I respect the fact that he says he hasn't researched all the material that Alex is referencing, but I don't think that he has intellectually pushed himself to those limits. Will he do so? I don't know.

Awesome Allen Watts, video!
 
#7
Seems to me the guy sidestepped Alex's inquiries. Pleading something like
'I don't know because i have not done the research '
The word that comes to mind is Agnostic. Something like - i hold no conclusive position.
Or talking without actually saying anything.

Or maybe he just did not want to get into it with Alex?

As to the final question if he does come back to know something about Max Planck and others , the 'double slit' would be useful ..not being sarcastic, I THOUGHT EVERYBODY KNEW THAT! Really i did.
(In the end, I guess i just don't have a opinion)
I don't think that he side stepped Alex's inquiries, though you may be right. If Derek actually does the research and come back for another interview, he certainly didn't. However, if he never comes back, then you know that he is fake as fuck. We will see.
 

Alex

Administrator
#8
But the Flat Earther's are right in the regard that Nobody has yet found it necessary to dedicate the money required to perform a cutting-edge end-all Explain-Like-I'm-A-Flat-Earther Round Earth demonstration.
I may be missing the point here... but there are a countless fields of science that provide independent verification of our spherical planet. it doesn't seem to be a " lack of proof" situation.

for example, snipers aren't flat earthers:

The Coriolis force minutely changes the trajectory of a bullet, affecting accuracy at extremely long distances. It is adjusted for by accurate long-distance shooters, such as snipers. At the latitude of Sacramento, California, a 1,000 yd (910 m) northward shot would be deflected 2.8 in (71 mm) to the right.

Coriolis force - Wikipedia
 
#9
I may be missing the point here... but there are a countless fields of science that provide independent verification of our spherical planet. it doesn't seem to be a " lack of proof" situation.

for example, snipers aren't flat earthers:

The Coriolis force minutely changes the trajectory of a bullet, affecting accuracy at extremely long distances. It is adjusted for by accurate long-distance shooters, such as snipers. At the latitude of Sacramento, California, a 1,000 yd (910 m) northward shot would be deflected 2.8 in (71 mm) to the right.
Coriolis force - Wikipedia
Yes, I think. Thank you for the response. I'm familiar with your example and there are many such that satisfy most people's curiosity.
My point was that nobody has spent the money/energy that would be needed to satisfy the most dedicated Flat-Earthers. Might be worth it.

I think all you would need is a long enough lake, a lazer, and a target to shoot end to end like a foot or so above the water level, and a third measurement in the center to confirm it's less in the middle than on the ends.
But you would also have to get a S-Ton of famous or recognized Flat Earthers to be present and approve of the method in order for the message to get out.
 
#10
Yes, I think. Thank you for the response. I'm familiar with your example and there are many such that satisfy most people's curiosity.
My point was that nobody has spent the money/energy that would be needed to satisfy the most dedicated Flat-Earthers. Might be worth it.

I think all you would need is a long enough lake, a lazer, and a target to shoot end to end like a foot or so above the water level, and a third measurement in the center to confirm it's less in the middle than on the ends.
But you would also have to get a S-Ton of famous or recognized Flat Earthers to be present and approve of the method in order for the message to get out.
This is a fascinating topic to me, and I think both, flat earthers and globe earthers might have a bit of shit wrong. Nominally, as mentioned many times over, the earth doesn't look fuckin flat to me unless you are driving across Kansas or parts of Nevada. There are hills, mountains, and all kinds of shit that reveal this thing isn't flat. However, that does not make me jump to the conclusion that we are living on a ball, but nor does it make me think that we are living on a fucking dinner plate surrounded by Antarctica.

On the contrary, in the "mind control" apparatus called school, we were constantly blasted with this idea that the earth is the third "planet" from the sun in a "solar system" that consisted of 9 planets.....well, that shit has changed eight. I guess I shouldn't have grown up in the 80's, no pun intended. My question is this, whether the earth is flat or round, is there really a fucking solar system?

I ask these kind of questions tongue in cheek, of course. However, a lot of the people who come up with all these kind of theories seem to do so from the standpoint of dick in mouth. In other words, they have an agenda and they are getting paid. I find it fascinating that astrophysicists are positing that life exists on other planets based on flickering lights observed in stars, and try to convince us so through metaphors that reference candle light in our homes. Life is already right here, on Earth, flat or fuckin round as a basketball! Why are we not exhausting our resources to research the mystery that we are, instead of building nonsensical radar to scan space that leads to little or no results? What about the bottom of the ocean? Isn't it said that we know more about the surface of the moon than the bottom of the ocean?

I think part of it has to do with this "the grass is greener on the other side" psychology. Nevertheless, you get to the other side and realize that there is nothing but rocks in that yard. If the Mars rover is real, and those missions are real, just look at the footage.

Jumping back to what many people call Flat Earth Retards, or Flatards, I have a few thoughts on that. By the way, Flat Earthers, I am just using stereotypes about you guys in this article, so please do not be offended. I am sure that the gist of you are great people that know when to feed your dog and cat, kids, or say "hello" at the grocery store. However, I must tell you idiots, WATER IS NOT ALWAYS LEVEL! Go to your kitchen sink, throw a bit of water on the counter, and you can see that droplets are curved, so shut the fuck up about water always being level!

Nevertheless, Globe Earthers, science doesn't give a shit if you are right about the earth being a sphere or not. Did you all go to space and witness, in fact, that this shit is a globe? No, none of you have. You can only reference the people that had supposedly seen this. Also, not every astronaut is going to know. They had to get far enough away to see the shit as a globe.

I hope these thoughts resonate with my friends. Please expound!
 

Alex

Administrator
#11
Yes, I think. Thank you for the response. I'm familiar with your example and there are many such that satisfy most people's curiosity.
My point was that nobody has spent the money/energy that would be needed to satisfy the most dedicated Flat-Earthers. Might be worth it.

I think all you would need is a long enough lake, a lazer, and a target to shoot end to end like a foot or so above the water level, and a third measurement in the center to confirm it's less in the middle than on the ends.
But you would also have to get a S-Ton of famous or recognized Flat Earthers to be present and approve of the method in order for the message to get out.
the existing body of science should satisfy anyone a thousand/million times over.
 

Alex

Administrator
#12
Nevertheless, Globe Earthers, science doesn't give a shit if you are right about the earth being a sphere or not. Did you all go to space and witness, in fact, that this shit is a globe? No, none of you have. You can only reference the people that had supposedly seen this.
anyone who was ever entertained the idea of a flat earth needs to slow down and really relearn science... I mean the basic s*** you slept through in high school... newton and the apple and the tree (probably not a real story but you get the idea).
 
#13
the existing body of science should satisfy anyone a thousand/million times over.
The real allure of this subject is that it's the Ultimate example of Albert Einsteins "If you can't explain it simply...".
It's the Ultimate Eli5.

The hard question is: What is it that prevents us from affording Flat Earthers the same patience we would a five year old?

I think it's just harder to ELi5 it than anyone want's to admit.
Also most people who haven't done the actual work, schooling, science etc. (including myself) have only been convinced of the knowledge, rather than personally confirmed.
 
#14
NDE's Proof
Where the "proof" that Near Death Experiencers aren't drawing all their NDE experience/knowledge from The Ether while alive? Or perhaps just as our dreams supposedly occur in the final seconds upon awakening... Why wouldn't we assume NDE's do the same? Not to mention how about a combination of the two?
Well drawing knowledge from the ether isn't a materialistic concept, and I think while it may be difficult to prove exactly what an NDE is, it is pretty easy to prove it doesn't follow the materialistic paradigm.

I think with all these demands for proof, you ultimately have to ask yourself whether the alternative is so contorted, that it is easier to believe the non-materialistic explanation than the contorted materialistic alternative.

David
 
#15
Well drawing knowledge from the ether isn't a materialistic concept, and I think while it may be difficult to prove exactly what an NDE is, it is pretty easy to prove it doesn't follow the materialistic paradigm.

I think with all these demands for proof, you ultimately have to ask yourself whether the alternative is so contorted, that it is easier to believe the non-materialistic explanation than the contorted materialistic alternative.

David
If you took a time machine and showed your cell phone to someone 1000 years ago, and told them that there are machines inside the device which are calculating hundreds of pages of data per second, they would burn you at the stake.
Today that fact doesn't seem contorted, or ever difficult to conceptualize.
So I must disagree with your assessment. I think it would be very easy to conceptualize a physical information-storing ether of which we just aren't currently aware.
-Shout out the Chester H. and his 'brain is just a transceiver' concept.
 
#16
This was Alex in fine form.
It's always frustrating when people say, "I haven't done the research" when it's something as simple as the double-split experiment.
How can you have a podcast exploring the reality of things and NEVER HEARD OF IT?
Seriously now? Well done.
I don't often come here to praise Alex enough because as far as I'm concerned he's 95% great and no one needs to hear that all the time.
So, on the other 5%... How about the death of desert flora?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/unexpected-desert-plants-are-struggling-in-higher-heat/
 
#17
If you took a time machine and showed your cell phone to someone 1000 years ago, and told them that there are machines inside the device which are calculating hundreds of pages of data per second, they would burn you at the stake.
Today that fact doesn't seem contorted, or ever difficult to conceptualize.
So I must disagree with your assessment. I think it would be very easy to conceptualize a physical information-storing ether of which we just aren't currently aware.
-Shout out the Chester H. and his 'brain is just a transceiver' concept.
If you went back 1000 years, you might find people who were more in touch with spiritual things but obviously far less savvy about technology such as cell phones.

Maybe we are talking at cross purposes.

A lot of people seem desperate to stay within explanations that fit the materialist viewpoint. Thus they take all the NDE evidence and try to explain it in terms of there being some residual processing going on in the brain while the heart is stopped - even though this seems to be against other medical knowledge - such as the fact that people black out after a few seconds with no heartbeat. Then to keep this explanation alive, they have to exclude all the NDE evidence that still will not fit - such as the NDE's in which people's consciousness seems to drift away from the room their body is in, and observe and remember things going on in other places.

Another example of a contorted explanation is the super-psi concept that mediums do not contact dead people, but have incredibly powerful psi that can extract information from many sources and construct what the dead person could plausibly have said if he still exists.

David
 
#18
This was Alex in fine form.
It's always frustrating when people say, "I haven't done the research" when it's something as simple as the double-split experiment.
How can you have a podcast exploring the reality of things and NEVER HEARD OF IT?
Seriously now? Well done.
I don't often come here to praise Alex enough because as far as I'm concerned he's 95% great and no one needs to hear that all the time.
So, on the other 5%... How about the death of desert flora?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/unexpected-desert-plants-are-struggling-in-higher-heat/
Jack,

Since you are obviously interested in climate change, I do wish you would discuss the issue in a more sustained way, rather than simply post articles like the above.

I have shown you that the total claimed rise in earth's temperature in the last 140 years, is 1° C. All I ask is for you to stop and think - is that a satisfactory explanation for flowers dying in the desert?

The flowers are dying because there is a heat wave, and heat waves have always happened. I was on holiday in Nevada and California a few years back, and unusually there was some rain and flooding - I mean does varying weather need an explanation?

David
 

Alex

Administrator
#19
... have only been convinced of the knowledge, rather than personally confirmed.
this gets into some deep psychology and philosophy of science stuff. I mean, the reality of our modern life is that we can't "personally confirm" shit. we live in an iPhone centered, cloud-powered, fiat/crypto currency driven world. I think the flat-earth thing is an attempt to reassert the very comfortable ( but misguided) idea that I am the center of the universe... you should prove it to me... it only matters what I observe and believe.

on a completely different parapolitical level, it's a wonderful way for the conspiracy culture to discredit itself.
 
#20
this gets into some deep psychology and philosophy of science stuff. I mean, the reality of our modern life is that we can't "personally confirm" shit. we live in an iPhone centered, cloud-powered, fiat/crypto currency driven world. I think the flat-earth thing is an attempt to reassert the very comfortable ( but misguided) idea that I am the center of the universe... you should prove it to me... it only matters what I observe and believe.

on a completely different parapolitical level, it's a wonderful way for the conspiracy culture to discredit itself.
Masterfully put. 100% agree. And thank you for letting me go out on that limb.

I think I can tie this back to the Gloria Steinem effect.

Picture how easy it would be to lovingly provide a satisfactory demonstration so that any Flat-Earther, and/or Five-Year-Old could verify/confirm for them selves.

Doesn't it seem peculiar that this is just just barely radical enough a debate to cleave a ravine between State-sanctioned Science and otherwise-intelligent Anti-State wannabe scientists?

It's just stupid enough that nobody will lend it serious concern... Therefore it guarantees longest possible shelf life.
 
Last edited:
Top