|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 23 2017 09:54 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2017 09:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 23 2017 09:15 Plansix wrote:
They were not tricked into anything but thinking less of their fellow Americans and feeding a culture war. Russia isn't tricking us into fights, we are already fighting them. Russia wants to make sure we never getting past them. Every time we inch closer to some common ground on a topic, they will do everything to convince Americans that they need to get back in their corners. You're talking about something slightly different than mohdoo is. But to be clear, could you provide an example of what you're talking about? http://thehill.com/policy/technology/358025-thousands-attended-protest-organized-by-russians-on-facebook Show nested quote +
Thousands attended protest organized by Russians on Facebook
Thousands of Americans attended a march last November organized by a Russian group that used social media to interfere in the 2016 election.
The demonstration in New York City, which took place a few days after the election, appears to be the largest and most successful known effort to date pulled off by Russian-linked groups intent on using social media platforms to influence American politics.
Sixteen thousand Facebook users said that they planned to attend a Trump protest on Nov. 12, 2016, organized by the Facebook page for BlackMattersUS, a Russian-linked group that sought to capitalize on racial tensions between black and white Americans. The event was shared with 61,000 users.
As many as 5,000 to 10,000 protesters actually convened at Manhattan's Union Square. They then marched to Trump Tower, according to media reports at the time.
The BlackMattersUS-organized rally took advantage of outrage among groups on the left following President Trump’s victory on Nov. 8 to galvanize support for its event. The group’s protest was the fourth consecutive anti-Trump rally in New York following election night, and one of many across the country.
“Join us in the streets! Stop Trump and his bigoted agenda!” reads the Facebook event page for the rally. “Divided is the reason we just fell. We must unite despite our differences to stop HATE from ruling the land.”
While the focus has been on Russian efforts ahead of the election, the BlackMatters rally days after Trump's victory shows that Russian-linked social media influence efforts continued after the election.
The BlackMatters organizing group was connected to the Internet Research Agency, a Russian “troll farm” with ties to the Kremlin, according to a recent investigation by the Russian Magazine RBC. Facebook has identified the Internet Research Agency as the group responsible for purchasing 3,000 political ads on Facebook’s platform and operating 470 accounts that appear to have attempted to influence the perspectives of Americans during the 2016 elections.
Facebook has since deleted those 470 accounts. BlackMatters's account has been deleted as well, although Facebook has not officially confirmed the reason for BlackMatters being deleted from its site. Twitter also appears to have deleted an account associated with the group, possibly in its own purge of accounts linked to Russian actors.
“This is another example of why it’s important to disclose who is paying for promoted posts on Facebook,” said Katherine Haenschen, a professor who researches digital media at Virginia Tech.
The march is an example of the types of “organic content” — posts created by users, rather than as ads — that lawmakers are looking for as they investigate the extent of Russian political manipulation of social media platforms. But Haenschen believes Facebook’s paid features might have helped the event go viral.
“It also speaks to the challenges of organic reach. It’s unlikely that this audience is free or organic,” Haenschen said, referring to BlackMatters's Facebook reach which included over 99,000 users who liked the page, according to an archived version of the page from May 16, 2017.
Facebook recently announced that it would introduce new transparency features, including making users who run election ads verify their identities with the company.
Haenschen says that this isn’t enough. She argues that this type of event that isn’t explicitly about elections could fall through the cracks, and says that Facebook should be aware of all users using the platform’s paid features.
For its part, Facebook says that it's trying to make sure that such content stays off its platform.
"The foreign interference we saw is reprehensible and outrageous and opened a new battleground for our company, our industry and our society," says Facebook General Counsel Colin Stretch in testimony he is set to deliver to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Wednesday. "That foreign actors, hiding behind fake accounts, abused our platform and other internet services to try to sow division and discord — and to try to undermine our election process — is an assault on democracy, and it violates all of our values."
Top Democrats in the House and Senate Intelligence committees, Sen. Mark Warner (Va.) and Rep. Adam Schiff (Calif.), have both said that such organic posts tied to paid content will reveal the true scale of the Kremlin’s alleged social media campaign.
According to numbers in Facebook’s general counsel’s leaked congressional testimony, the number of people potentially touched by organic content eclipses the potential number reached by ads by hundreds of millions.
They are using platforms to hijack real movements and create protests with no real goal or agenda. And real people attended and believed they were protesting with some purpose or end goal. But the reality is that its a Russian troll and all they wanted was black people in Time Square protesting Trump so they could post it on their "Fuck Black People Who Take a Knee" account and post that in North Carolina. They are hijacking the basic mechanics of political engagement and rending them powerless. And we didn't even know if was happening until a year later.
I honestly don't see how that's anything significant? They promoted a rally that was actually like the 4th day of ongoing protests in NYC which were part of hundreds of rallies across the country.
I also love how people talk about likes and impressions with absolutely 0 reference to how many bots are in those numbers (wouldn't want their shareholders and advertisers to realize there are millions and millions of automated users. Remember, Hillary was more popular on facebook in Baghdad than she was anywhere in the US).
Acting like this rally thing is indicative of anything significant is silly. It didn't do anything other than maybe give some anti-Trump protesters a herd of people to form around (though the on the ground organizers probably did that more than the facebook post).
Finally, the Guardian report they cite as covering it mentions talking to the event organizers, are we to presume they were talking with Russians/agents of Russia that organized the previous days without fanfare?
This is straight up hysteria and it's disappointing to see people fall for it.
|
|
|
1 This is amazing
2 Despite claiming otherwise, this guy is obviously using scientific methodology. Test hypothesis by experiment. That is the basis of the scientific method.
3 I don't quite understand how that experiment is supposed to work? What are you going to see from 500m in the sky that is different between a flat earth and a round earth? And couldn't you instead just climb on a mountain, or a high skyscraper to see the same thing?
4 Still, pretty cool dude from that article. I know your mention of this is sarcastic, but i can't help but be impressed by a man who builds a rocket by himself to prove his point in a scientific way.
5 Of course, this depends on him actually accepting the results of the experiment when it doesn't prove that the earth is flat.
|
Uhm, he will go 550m up (or just die). Not see curvature (or anything at all) and claim the earth is flat.
There is nothing scientific about this. He built a rocket which is kinda impressive but thats about it.
|
To complete the euros dismissively posting about American nuts I'll contribute my favourite line of his:
“I know about aerodynamics and fluid dynamics and how things move through the air. But that’s not science, that’s just a formula.”
|
Dunno, he seems to think that he will see something at that height that shows whether the world is flat or round. I am not too well-versed in flat earth theory to know what that would be. My understanding is that you would need to do some sort of sub-orbital flight to actually see something that proves the world is flat/not flat. But maybe flat earth theory suggest that there is a waterfall at the edge of the world that you are able to see when you go up 550m, or something like that.
But at least he actually does an experiment instead of simply stating "Its obvious" based on some weird logic. I respect that.
And as long as he accepts that flat earth might not be correct when he does not see the flat earthy thing that he expects to see, that is a scientific experiment.
|
On November 23 2017 13:12 Danglars wrote:Pretty unified in this forum calling for his resignation, but in the interests of hearing both sides of the argument, here's a feminist writing an article for the Washington Post. Show nested quote +As a feminist and the author of a book on rape culture, I could reasonably be expected to lead the calls for Al Franken to step down, following allegations that he forced his tongue down a woman’s throat, accompanied by a photo of him grinning as he moves in to grope her breasts while she sleeps. It’s disgusting. He treated a sleeping woman as a comedy prop, no more human than the contents of Carrot Top’s trunk, and I firmly believe he should suffer social and professional consequences for it.
But I don’t believe resigning from his position is the only possible consequence, or the one that’s best for American women.
Cynics on both the right and left will presume I am passing by this particular steam tray on 2017’s smorgasbord of feminist outrage because Franken is a Democrat, and so am I. (I was even his proud constituent for two years.) In the most superficial sense, this is true. But it’s meaningless to say it’s because I am a Democrat without asking why I am a Democrat. If you understand what it means to be a Democrat today — that is, why it makes sense to vote blue over red in this highly polarized political environment — you can understand why it might not make the most sense to demand Franken’s resignation, effective immediately.
I am a Democrat because I am a feminist who lives under a two-party system, where one party consistently votes against the interests of women while the other sometimes does not. I am not a true believer in the party itself nor in any politician. I am a realist who recognizes that we get two viable choices, and Democrats are members of the only party positioned to pump the brakes on Republicans’ gleeful race toward Atwoodian dystopia. Meanwhile, I recognize that men’s harassment of and violence against women is a systemic issue, not a Democrat or Republican problem, a Hollywood problem, a sports problem, or a media problem. Its roots lie in a patriarchal culture that trains men to believe they are entitled to control women’s bodies —for sex, for sport, for childbearing, for comedy. [...]
t would feel good, momentarily, to see Franken resign and the Democratic governor of Minnesota, Mark Dayton, appoint a senator who has not (as far as we know) harmed women. If I believed for one second that Franken is the only Democrat in the Senate who has done something like this, with or without photographic evidence, I would see that as the best and most appropriate option. But in the world we actually live in, I’m betting that there will be more. And more after that. And they won’t all come from states with Democratic governors and a deep bench of progressive replacements. Some will, if ousted, have their successors chosen by Republicans.
I'm a feminist, I study rape culture, and I don't want Al Franken to resign
I understand the sentiment, but in my opinion it is quite misguided. If you want to have actual turnout of democratic voters you should not have to say "yes, Bill Clinton / Al Franken / ... have abused women and we enabled and protected them, but it was all so that we could ineffectively defend women's interests".
The democratic party should be purged of any people with allegations (and in some cases even rumors) of sexual misconduct against them, if they want to meaningfully run on the republican party's association with predators like Moore, Trump.
And of course it is the right thing to do, and it would be considered a no-brainer in any society which is not so strongly polarized as the USA.
|
On November 23 2017 19:19 Simberto wrote:
Dunno, he seems to think that he will see something at that height that shows whether the world is flat or round. I am not too well-versed in flat earth theory to know what that would be. My understanding is that you would need to do some sort of sub-orbital flight to actually see something that proves the world is flat/not flat. But maybe flat earth theory suggest that there is a waterfall at the edge of the world that you are able to see when you go up 550m, or something like that.
But at least he actually does an experiment instead of simply stating "Its obvious" based on some weird logic. I respect that.
And as long as he accepts that flat earth might not be correct when he does not see the flat earthy thing that he expects to see, that is a scientific experiment.
I think when he gets up there hes going to try and find White Walkers hiding behind the Wall that keeps all the water from escaping the edges of our desperately flat Earth.
|
On November 23 2017 18:46 Simberto wrote:1 This is amazing 2 Despite claiming otherwise, this guy is obviously using scientific methodology. Test hypothesis by experiment. That is the basis of the scientific method. 3 I don't quite understand how that experiment is supposed to work? What are you going to see from 500m in the sky that is different between a flat earth and a round earth? And couldn't you instead just climb on a mountain, or a high skyscraper to see the same thing? 4 Still, pretty cool dude from that article. I know your mention of this is sarcastic, but i can't help but be impressed by a man who builds a rocket by himself to prove his point in a scientific way. 5 Of course, this depends on him actually accepting the results of the experiment when it doesn't prove that the earth is flat.
I'm sorry, but your points are actually missing it.
They explained it in another article. His promary intention was zo fly his rocket. He tried crowdfunding this one after his first one blew up and sent him to hospital for a while and only collected miserable 300 bucks.
He then started another crowdfunding claiming that he wants to research the flat earth theory and voila... 8000 bucks raised.
It looks like he just found a gullible enough chunk of the population to pay for his craziness.
But of course the story is funny no matter whether this is mentioned or not.
|
United States24736 Posts
On November 23 2017 19:26 Grumbels wrote:
The democratic party should be purged of any people with allegations (and in some cases even rumors) of sexual misconduct against them, if they want to meaningfully run on the republican party's association with predators like Moore, Trump.
Think about what you are calling for... to purge from the organization anyonesomeone who has even a rumor of an allegation against them. That is way over the line. It enforces a bandwagon/witch hunt culture that is as destructive or more destructive than the Roy Moores of the world. It also empowers opponents to quickly eliminate political threats. I think if you tone down your point somewhat, it is valid.
|
He clearly states in some cases and not just anybody with rumours suggesting abhorrent behaviour. Albeit not stating what is meant by some and under what circumstances you'll start treating rumours as sufficient evidence, it's clear that it's not a blanket statement as you make it out to be.
In the end you even appear to agree with the general sentiment of pursuing that kind of behaviour. I think you're both like minded here and trip over words and misreadings.
|
United States24736 Posts
On November 23 2017 20:44 Artisreal wrote:
He clearly states in some cases and not just anybody with rumours suggesting abhorrent behaviour. Albeit not stating what is meant by some and under what circumstances you'll start treating rumours as sufficient evidence, it's clear that it's not a blanket statement as you make it out to be.
In the end you even appear to agree with the general sentiment of pursuing that kind of behaviour. I think you're both like minded here and trip over words and misreadings.
I softened my statement (with markup) but still have the same general concern. A single allegation is not even always grounds for purging someone for the reason I gave above.
|
On November 23 2017 20:50 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2017 20:44 Artisreal wrote:
He clearly states in some cases and not just anybody with rumours suggesting abhorrent behaviour. Albeit not stating what is meant by some and under what circumstances you'll start treating rumours as sufficient evidence, it's clear that it's not a blanket statement as you make it out to be.
In the end you even appear to agree with the general sentiment of pursuing that kind of behaviour. I think you're both like minded here and trip over words and misreadings. I softened my statement (with markup) but still have the same general concern. A single allegation is not even always grounds for purging someone for the reason I gave above.
And I entirely agree with you, in general. Out of the top of my head I cannot fabricate an example where a single allegation made enough sense to justify prosecution. But a single allegation justifies scrutiny.
And if that brings about that a person has been known in the community for being a creep -Weinstein or Moore or Spacey are the only ones that come to mind (and I'm sure many more) - or settlements become public, a single allegation lead to more.
A single, unproven allegation doesn't warrant consequences on its own, much less firing somebody.
|
Congress is a cesspool of offenders. We should probably get rid of pretty much all of them to be sure.
|
Maybe the "settlement industry" should just be brought down, its a perversion of law and at best helps some victims to get rich for nothing and offenders to get out of jail.
Even the idea that you can get serious money just for being a victim, even tho you had no actual financial loss, is stupid.
|
On November 23 2017 21:47 Velr wrote:
Maybe the "settlement industry" should just be brought down, its a perversion of law and at best helps some victims to get rich for nothing and offenders to get out of jail.
Even the idea that you can get serious money just for being a victim, even tho you had no actual financial loss, is stupid.
losses can be in forms other than financial.
and you can't really take down the "settlemente industry" whatever that is, without taking down the legal industry.
|
On November 23 2017 17:23 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2017 09:54 Plansix wrote:On November 23 2017 09:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 23 2017 09:15 Plansix wrote:
They were not tricked into anything but thinking less of their fellow Americans and feeding a culture war. Russia isn't tricking us into fights, we are already fighting them. Russia wants to make sure we never getting past them. Every time we inch closer to some common ground on a topic, they will do everything to convince Americans that they need to get back in their corners. You're talking about something slightly different than mohdoo is. But to be clear, could you provide an example of what you're talking about? http://thehill.com/policy/technology/358025-thousands-attended-protest-organized-by-russians-on-facebook
Thousands attended protest organized by Russians on Facebook
Thousands of Americans attended a march last November organized by a Russian group that used social media to interfere in the 2016 election.
The demonstration in New York City, which took place a few days after the election, appears to be the largest and most successful known effort to date pulled off by Russian-linked groups intent on using social media platforms to influence American politics.
Sixteen thousand Facebook users said that they planned to attend a Trump protest on Nov. 12, 2016, organized by the Facebook page for BlackMattersUS, a Russian-linked group that sought to capitalize on racial tensions between black and white Americans. The event was shared with 61,000 users.
As many as 5,000 to 10,000 protesters actually convened at Manhattan's Union Square. They then marched to Trump Tower, according to media reports at the time.
The BlackMattersUS-organized rally took advantage of outrage among groups on the left following President Trump’s victory on Nov. 8 to galvanize support for its event. The group’s protest was the fourth consecutive anti-Trump rally in New York following election night, and one of many across the country.
“Join us in the streets! Stop Trump and his bigoted agenda!” reads the Facebook event page for the rally. “Divided is the reason we just fell. We must unite despite our differences to stop HATE from ruling the land.”
While the focus has been on Russian efforts ahead of the election, the BlackMatters rally days after Trump's victory shows that Russian-linked social media influence efforts continued after the election.
The BlackMatters organizing group was connected to the Internet Research Agency, a Russian “troll farm” with ties to the Kremlin, according to a recent investigation by the Russian Magazine RBC. Facebook has identified the Internet Research Agency as the group responsible for purchasing 3,000 political ads on Facebook’s platform and operating 470 accounts that appear to have attempted to influence the perspectives of Americans during the 2016 elections.
Facebook has since deleted those 470 accounts. BlackMatters's account has been deleted as well, although Facebook has not officially confirmed the reason for BlackMatters being deleted from its site. Twitter also appears to have deleted an account associated with the group, possibly in its own purge of accounts linked to Russian actors.
“This is another example of why it’s important to disclose who is paying for promoted posts on Facebook,” said Katherine Haenschen, a professor who researches digital media at Virginia Tech.
The march is an example of the types of “organic content” — posts created by users, rather than as ads — that lawmakers are looking for as they investigate the extent of Russian political manipulation of social media platforms. But Haenschen believes Facebook’s paid features might have helped the event go viral.
“It also speaks to the challenges of organic reach. It’s unlikely that this audience is free or organic,” Haenschen said, referring to BlackMatters's Facebook reach which included over 99,000 users who liked the page, according to an archived version of the page from May 16, 2017.
Facebook recently announced that it would introduce new transparency features, including making users who run election ads verify their identities with the company.
Haenschen says that this isn’t enough. She argues that this type of event that isn’t explicitly about elections could fall through the cracks, and says that Facebook should be aware of all users using the platform’s paid features.
For its part, Facebook says that it's trying to make sure that such content stays off its platform.
"The foreign interference we saw is reprehensible and outrageous and opened a new battleground for our company, our industry and our society," says Facebook General Counsel Colin Stretch in testimony he is set to deliver to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Wednesday. "That foreign actors, hiding behind fake accounts, abused our platform and other internet services to try to sow division and discord — and to try to undermine our election process — is an assault on democracy, and it violates all of our values."
Top Democrats in the House and Senate Intelligence committees, Sen. Mark Warner (Va.) and Rep. Adam Schiff (Calif.), have both said that such organic posts tied to paid content will reveal the true scale of the Kremlin’s alleged social media campaign.
According to numbers in Facebook’s general counsel’s leaked congressional testimony, the number of people potentially touched by organic content eclipses the potential number reached by ads by hundreds of millions.
They are using platforms to hijack real movements and create protests with no real goal or agenda. And real people attended and believed they were protesting with some purpose or end goal. But the reality is that its a Russian troll and all they wanted was black people in Time Square protesting Trump so they could post it on their "Fuck Black People Who Take a Knee" account and post that in North Carolina. They are hijacking the basic mechanics of political engagement and rending them powerless. And we didn't even know if was happening until a year later. I honestly don't see how that's anything significant? They promoted a rally that was actually like the 4th day of ongoing protests in NYC which were part of hundreds of rallies across the country. I also love how people talk about likes and impressions with absolutely 0 reference to how many bots are in those numbers (wouldn't want their shareholders and advertisers to realize there are millions and millions of automated users. Remember, Hillary was more popular on facebook in Baghdad than she was anywhere in the US). Acting like this rally thing is indicative of anything significant is silly. It didn't do anything other than maybe give some anti-Trump protesters a herd of people to form around (though the on the ground organizers probably did that more than the facebook post). Finally, the Guardian report they cite as covering it mentions talking to the event organizers, are we to presume they were talking with Russians/agents of Russia that organized the previous days without fanfare? This is straight up hysteria and it's disappointing to see people fall for it.
It's funny how that works. People just need a foreign devil. I seem to recall a website that was used which helped organize the hundreds of rallies that were being held. This protest was likely listed on that very website. I forgot what it was called, but you could just type in your postcode and you'd see like half a dozen protests in your neighborhood. Crediting the Russians who may have made that Facebook page for the thousands of attendants does seem like a stretch.
On November 23 2017 13:15 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2017 13:12 Danglars wrote:Pretty unified in this forum calling for his resignation, but in the interests of hearing both sides of the argument, here's a feminist writing an article for the Washington Post. As a feminist and the author of a book on rape culture, I could reasonably be expected to lead the calls for Al Franken to step down, following allegations that he forced his tongue down a woman’s throat, accompanied by a photo of him grinning as he moves in to grope her breasts while she sleeps. It’s disgusting. He treated a sleeping woman as a comedy prop, no more human than the contents of Carrot Top’s trunk, and I firmly believe he should suffer social and professional consequences for it.
But I don’t believe resigning from his position is the only possible consequence, or the one that’s best for American women.
Cynics on both the right and left will presume I am passing by this particular steam tray on 2017’s smorgasbord of feminist outrage because Franken is a Democrat, and so am I. (I was even his proud constituent for two years.) In the most superficial sense, this is true. But it’s meaningless to say it’s because I am a Democrat without asking why I am a Democrat. If you understand what it means to be a Democrat today — that is, why it makes sense to vote blue over red in this highly polarized political environment — you can understand why it might not make the most sense to demand Franken’s resignation, effective immediately.
I am a Democrat because I am a feminist who lives under a two-party system, where one party consistently votes against the interests of women while the other sometimes does not. I am not a true believer in the party itself nor in any politician. I am a realist who recognizes that we get two viable choices, and Democrats are members of the only party positioned to pump the brakes on Republicans’ gleeful race toward Atwoodian dystopia. Meanwhile, I recognize that men’s harassment of and violence against women is a systemic issue, not a Democrat or Republican problem, a Hollywood problem, a sports problem, or a media problem. Its roots lie in a patriarchal culture that trains men to believe they are entitled to control women’s bodies —for sex, for sport, for childbearing, for comedy. [...]
t would feel good, momentarily, to see Franken resign and the Democratic governor of Minnesota, Mark Dayton, appoint a senator who has not (as far as we know) harmed women. If I believed for one second that Franken is the only Democrat in the Senate who has done something like this, with or without photographic evidence, I would see that as the best and most appropriate option. But in the world we actually live in, I’m betting that there will be more. And more after that. And they won’t all come from states with Democratic governors and a deep bench of progressive replacements. Some will, if ousted, have their successors chosen by Republicans.
I'm a feminist, I study rape culture, and I don't want Al Franken to resign Yeah, that is some cynical garbage right there and the exact shit that got us here in the first place. Just another version of the Bill Clinton excuse.
Somehow what this lady is saying is "cynical garbage" and "the exact shit that got us here in the first place", but continuing to vote for Democrats who trot out corporate shills as election candidates is fine, and organizing a third party is ridiculous despite the fact that a majority of Americans have a perceived need for a third party.
This lady uses the exact same lies (I intended to type 'lines' and made a typo, but I'm keeping it in, not because it is accurate but just because I like it) that people in this thread do when GreenHorizon complains about the Democrats. She literally says the same fucking thing to excuse getting rid of Franken:
"I am a Democrat because I am a feminist who lives under a two-party system, where one party consistently votes against the interests of women while the other sometimes does not."
And I get it, the context is different. Replacing an entire political party and potentially even upending the entire political system (allowing the removal of the two-party system) certainly is more difficult than just replacing one dude. But its the exact same excuse. Word for word. It seems like you just have different priorities than GreenHorizon and are willing to stick up for those but not others. So I think that certain people talking down to such a perspective should reconsider before opening their mouths or just stick with "you're right, but I am a cynical bastard".
|
As long as the US election system is what it is, a third party vote is just a throwaway vote. At best is does nothing, at worst.. Well, Trump.
|
On November 23 2017 19:19 Simberto wrote:
Dunno, he seems to think that he will see something at that height that shows whether the world is flat or round. I am not too well-versed in flat earth theory to know what that would be. My understanding is that you would need to do some sort of sub-orbital flight to actually see something that proves the world is flat/not flat. But maybe flat earth theory suggest that there is a waterfall at the edge of the world that you are able to see when you go up 550m, or something like that.
But at least he actually does an experiment instead of simply stating "Its obvious" based on some weird logic. I respect that.
And as long as he accepts that flat earth might not be correct when he does not see the flat earthy thing that he expects to see, that is a scientific experiment.
The distance - how far away is the last point You are able to see is different depending wheather Earth is flat or not. That being said You need some pretty accurate measuring device to actualy measure the difference. I doubt he will be able to do that. Perhaps he has calculated distance to some known to him objects and he will check for them?
Anyway like mentioned above stationary height (like skyscrapper) is much more suitable for such purpose since it is static making measerments much more accurate.
|
On November 23 2017 22:58 Velr wrote:
As long as the US election system is what it is, a third party vote is just a throwaway vote. At best is does nothing, at worst.. Well, Trump.
You poor cynical bastard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
