Mirror on the Moon

[Ginkgo]

I started the thread to be persuaded by others that we didn't go to the moon. That hasn't happened, so to me that's interesting, it shows that believers cannot put up clear evidence that we did go. This can be done with a post on a social internet platform. But those issues you mention cannot be dealt with (in any meaningful way) on a site like this.

Why would you think this? It takes a peculiar type of fringe mentality to say that man didn't land on the moon. As I said in my original post the evidence is clear that man went to the moon. The overwhelming majority of empirical and mathematical evidence points to the fact that man went to the moon. This evidence dwarfs any other counter factual evidence. The empirical evidence in this regard is as clear as anyone is ever going to get in this world,

The term 'fringe mentality' is too loaded to use in any meaningful way. Again like the term 'conspiracy theory' it comes with a built in position and attack. What does it mean, a person who does not think like everyone else?

I think it is possible to place conspiracy theories along a continuum based on the amount of credible factual evidence compared to the amount of credible counter factual evidence. On this basis some theories can clearly be regarded as wacko. Vapor trails from commercial jet aircraft is considered by some as evidence that government agents are using biological/chemical warfare against the American population. The non-landing on the moon theory occupies a similar place on the continuum. Other conspiracy theories occupy a grey area depending on the strength of the counter factual evidence.

The credibility of lunatic theories is misappropriated on the basis of a fallacy:

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Some conspiracy theories are more credible than others.

[Hobbes' Choice]

I started the thread to be persuaded by others that we didn't go to the moon. That hasn't happened, so to me that's interesting, it shows that believers cannot put up clear evidence that we did go. This can be done with a post on a social internet platform. But those issues you mention cannot be dealt with (in any meaningful way) on a site like this.

Yes, and that is why I asked you to prove that Kennedy was actually killed.
You can't.

Those issues need to be addressed. The first step is awareness and communicating that awareness. That is why sites like this are important.

[Hobbes' Choice]

The government is no longer where power lies.

If you're talking about secret societies same deal. The common man is no better. Humans are the problem.

Oh for fuck's sake!

Trixie's idea: In a tennis match the problem is the balls, the net and the rackets. If only we did not have to keep hitting the balls back over the net; then tennis would be great.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

The government is no longer where power lies.

If you're talking about secret societies same deal. The common man is no better. Humans are the problem.

Oh for fuck's sake!

Trixie's idea: In a tennis match the problem is the balls, the net and the rackets. If only we did not have to keep hitting the balls back over the net; then tennis would be great.

Hmm I see what you're saying but the problem is thus. Humans are weak, and fragile. This leads to selfish behavoir. Their weakness causes them to eat meat, lie, cheat, and generally treat other's like dirt because all they care about is money (because they are so fragile.) If we could upgrade humans on a DNA level, they could be more efficient, require less maintenance, more creative and more intelligient. The uberhuman would be less shackled and naturally the problems would dissappear on their own.

[Hobbes' Choice]

If you're talking about secret societies same deal. The common man is no better. Humans are the problem.

Oh for fuck's sake!

Trixie's idea: In a tennis match the problem is the balls, the net and the rackets. If only we did not have to keep hitting the balls back over the net; then tennis would be great.

Hmm I see what you're saying but the problem is thus. Humans are weak, and fragile. This leads to selfish behavoir. Their weakness causes them to eat meat, lie, cheat, and generally treat other's like dirt because all they care about is money (because they are so fragile.) If we could upgrade humans on a DNA level, they could be more efficient, require less maintenance, more creative and more intelligient. The uberhuman would be less shackled and naturally the problems would dissappear on their own.

Weak and fragile compared to what?
It's nothing to do with "weakness', eating meat, lying and cheating. These are strengths. Depends.
Weak people do not have the power to oppress others.
DNA is not like an iPhone that you can go in for an upgrade.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

Weak and fragile compared to what?
It's nothing to do with "weakness', eating meat, lying and cheating. These are strength. Depends.
Weak people do not have the power to oppress others.
DNA is not like an iPhone that you can go in for an upgrade.

Hardly strength. Is a zombie that constantly needs to feed on brains "strong"? A body that constantly requires food is not strong. A mind that craves simple pleasures like taste over moral logic is not strong. Cheaters cheat because they are too weak to play the game normally. Same with lying.

Says who? DNA is a code. Nanotechnology is already here. It's only a matter of time.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Weak and fragile compared to what?
It's nothing to do with "weakness', eating meat, lying and cheating. These are strength. Depends.
Weak people do not have the power to oppress others.
DNA is not like an iPhone that you can go in for an upgrade.

Hardly strength. Is a zombie that constantly needs to feed on brains "strong"? A body that constantly requires food is not strong. A mind that craves simple pleasures like taste over moral logic is not strong. Cheaters cheat because they are too weak to play the game normally. Same with lying.

Says who? DNA is a code. Nanotechnology is already here. It's only a matter of time.

In a world of meat a vegetarian starves. People cheat those weaker than themselves, as only weak and stupid people can be cheated on and lied to effectively.

Nano, is the size of your brain.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

Weak and fragile compared to what?
It's nothing to do with "weakness', eating meat, lying and cheating. These are strength. Depends.
Weak people do not have the power to oppress others.
DNA is not like an iPhone that you can go in for an upgrade.

Hardly strength. Is a zombie that constantly needs to feed on brains "strong"? A body that constantly requires food is not strong. A mind that craves simple pleasures like taste over moral logic is not strong. Cheaters cheat because they are too weak to play the game normally. Same with lying.

Says who? DNA is a code. Nanotechnology is already here. It's only a matter of time.

In a world of meat a vegetarian starves. People cheat those weaker than themselves, as only weak and stupid people can be cheated on and lied to effectively.

Nano, is the size of your brain.

Relative to the universe, yes. Relative to you, no. To me your brain is non-existent. Seems to me your sentiments are barbarian and have no place in civilized realms.

[Pluto]

The overwhelming majority of empirical and mathematical evidence points to the fact that man went to the moon. This evidence dwarfs any other counter factual evidence. The empirical evidence in this regard is as clear as anyone is ever going to get in this world,

This is what 9/11 truthers say. That they have the scientific evidence. But the world no longer works that way. Reality is created and while your figuring out how it was done, we'll create more, and you can study that too.

Actually, this was the quote I tried to remember but didn't:

From Wikileaks
Reality-based community is an informal term in the United States, used to refer to people who base their opinions more on observation than on planning—that the people rely on their observation of reality instead of seeking to shape reality in the image of their plans. The term has been defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from judicious study of discernible reality." It can be seen as an example of political framing.

The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, The New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, "Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush," quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove[1]):

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

[Hobbes' Choice]

Hardly strength. Is a zombie that constantly needs to feed on brains "strong"? A body that constantly requires food is not strong. A mind that craves simple pleasures like taste over moral logic is not strong. Cheaters cheat because they are too weak to play the game normally. Same with lying.

Says who? DNA is a code. Nanotechnology is already here. It's only a matter of time.

In a world of meat a vegetarian starves. People cheat those weaker than themselves, as only weak and stupid people can be cheated on and lied to effectively.

Nano, is the size of your brain.

Relative to the universe, yes. Relative to you, no. To me your brain is non-existent. Seems to me your sentiments are barbarian and have no place in civilised realms.

I bet you don't even know where the word barbarian comes from you little nit.

Omnivorousness is one of the most important qualities we have that has enabled us to master the planet. It is a key strength.
I am superior to a vegetarian, because, when I choose I can eat what she eats, but also have meat too.
What makes you think eating meat is barbarian?
Do you eat cheese and eggs? Are your shoes made of leather? What's the difference?
Let's take this one thing and examine your prejudices on it.

[thedoc]

Do you eat cheese and eggs? Are your shoes made of leather? What's the difference?
Let's take this one thing and examine your prejudices on it.

Given that leather is usually found on the more expensive shoes, I doubt that Trixie would spring for the good stuff, more likely she goes to "Super Shoes" for the cheapest thing she can find. There are 2 problems with this practice the rubber and plastic used in these products does not deteriorate like the natural leather products, and will be filling the land fills for a lot longer. The other issue is that leather comes from animals which are a renewable resource, petroleum is a limited resource that will run out one day. So in this regard leather is a better choice than rubber or plastic.

Interestingly the same arguments can be used for choosing real fur over synthetic fur, a renewable resource, and the items breakdown when discarded.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Do you eat cheese and eggs? Are your shoes made of leather? What's the difference?
Let's take this one thing and examine your prejudices on it.

Given that leather is usually found on the more expensive shoes, I doubt that Trixie would spring for the good stuff, more likely she goes to "Super Shoes" for the cheapest thing she can find. There are 2 problems with this practice the rubber and plastic used in these products does not deteriorate like the natural leather products, and will be filling the land fills for a lot longer. The other issue is that leather comes from animals which are a renewable resource, petroleum is a limited resource that will run out one day. So in this regard leather is a better choice than rubber or plastic.

Interestingly the same arguments can be used for choosing real fur over synthetic fur, a renewable resource, and the items breakdown when discarded.

Additionally the artificial products used in cheap shoes is harmful to shoe makers that work in sweat shops in the east; the substances are made from oil based products and contribute to pollution, the diminution of a limited resource and increase CO2 emissions.

Maybe Trixie goes bare-footed?

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

I bet you don't even know where the word barbarian comes from you little nit.

Omnivorousness is one of the most important qualities we have that has enabled us to master the planet. It is a key strength.
I am superior to a vegetarian, because, when I choose I can eat what she eats, but also have meat too.
What makes you think eating meat is barbarian?
Do you eat cheese and eggs? Are your shoes made of leather? What's the difference?
Let's take this one thing and examine your prejudices on it.

I don't eat cheese, I don't eat eggs, and I don't wear leather. You are inferior to vegetarian, vegetarians make choices to eat, they choose not to eat meat, whereas you are a mindless insect that devours whatever their DNA tells them to.

Given that leather is usually found on the more expensive shoes, I doubt that Trixie would spring for the good stuff, more likely she goes to "Super Shoes" for the cheapest thing she can find. There are 2 problems with this practice the rubber and plastic used in these products does not deteriorate like the natural leather products, and will be filling the land fills for a lot longer. The other issue is that leather comes from animals which are a renewable resource, petroleum is a limited resource that will run out one day. So in this regard leather is a better choice than rubber or plastic.

Interestingly the same arguments can be used for choosing real fur over synthetic fur, a renewable resource, and the items breakdown when discarded.

I hope you get skinned alive. PS: Leather shoes are made in sweatshops too. Landfills are a madeup problem as well, it's the least of my environmental concerns.

It's quite simple really. Anyone who supports meat-eating deserves to die. Anyone who supports the fur-industry deserves to be skinned alive. It's simple justice. Neither of you put any disclaimer supporting the ethical treatment of animals like free-range meat, so I can only hope you get what you deserve. Your words alone probably made some future animal suffer.

[thedoc]

Do you eat cheese and eggs? Are your shoes made of leather? What's the difference?
Let's take this one thing and examine your prejudices on it.

Given that leather is usually found on the more expensive shoes, I doubt that Trixie would spring for the good stuff, more likely she goes to "Super Shoes" for the cheapest thing she can find. There are 2 problems with this practice the rubber and plastic used in these products does not deteriorate like the natural leather products, and will be filling the land fills for a lot longer. The other issue is that leather comes from animals which are a renewable resource, petroleum is a limited resource that will run out one day. So in this regard leather is a better choice than rubber or plastic.

Interestingly the same arguments can be used for choosing real fur over synthetic fur, a renewable resource, and the items breakdown when discarded.

Additionally the artificial products used in cheap shoes is harmful to shoe makers that work in sweat shops in the east; the substances are made from oil based products and contribute to pollution, the diminution of a limited resource and increase CO2 emissions.

Maybe Trixie goes bare-footed?

There are few materials, natural or synthetic, that do not have some history of being toxic and harming those who worked with them. "Mad as a Hatter", had it's origins in the fact that hat makers used a mercury compound in making the hats, and after time working with it the mercury would absorb into the body and into the central nervous system causing madness, dentists also need to be regularly tested for mercury levels in their system. Right offhand I can't remember if there were any cautions for those workers actually mixing the rubber, but there were several chemical compounds that could have been dangerous if not handled properly.

[thedoc]

Your words alone probably made some future animal suffer.

Since the computer industry and the internet is largely based on plastic and electricity, most of the animals that have suffered and died were dinosaurs and they are long dead, at least that is my understanding, but I could be wrong. Perhaps Trixie will post again and prove that dinosaurs still exist.