Oh, he's thinking alright, thinking on overdrive, he just lacks the critical faculties to discern sense from nonsense. His attitude is admirable, I think, in that he is using his mind to the best of its ability to understand the world around him. The way in which he jumps to wild conclusions based on emotional reactions to unverified youtube videos, and the way in which he sees no qualitative difference between that and the work of scientists and researchers, I think speaks volumes about the current climate of post-truth alternative facts and suspicion of education. People who have expertise in fields he blathers about appear dismissive to him, because where do you start with someone like Eddie Bravo? He lacks the base knowledge to grasp how crazy these ideas he latches onto are, and it would take years of teaching to get him up to speed. Saying this comes across as hugely patronising and most people like Eddie will not understand why actual expertise cannot be cut into bitesize, easily digestible chunks in the same way as loony youtube conspiracies. They feel they're being fobbed-off and talked down to, which mostly they are, and it only serves to bolster their interest in theories they can understand (i.e. crazy ones made up by people with no expertise). Eddie Bravo is a poster boy for the failure of the American education system. But hey, he's still pretty wealthy so... go America! Did you know there's less chemtrails since Trump came into office? The ruling elite are going to be ****ed about that! ...once they take a break from drinking babies' blood, of course. What I love about this clip is how the InfoWars presenters are defending science against Eddie. His logic is amazing though: he thought flat earth was nonsense, because he had lots of photos of space on his phone... then he noticed that they were from NASA and he thought "Whoa! NASA control space pictures? NASA "dot gov"?! They're run by the government and faked the moon missions, so all photos of space must be phoney!" Add to that him thinking he's Sherlock Holmes for noticing that NASA often label their pictures as composites, or that we can't actually see the information gathered through radio telescopes or infra-red and we need graphic artists to translate that into forms that we can see in the visible light spectrum, and he's certain all NASA photos are CGI fakery. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzmZOu6XR8A Oh, and I'd bet money that at least some of these students of his who kept telling him to look into flat earth theory were winding him up and wanted to see him talk crazy in public about it.
Give it time! He never learnt how to distinguish imagination from data in the American public school system. He never learnt how to distinguish rhetoric from experiment in the American public school system. It failed him. It's really easy to go "Haha! What a dumb bumhole.", but I think there's a more serious underlying issue at work, and more importantly for us, a more interesting conversation.
Yes. Who else do you blame, if not the people who said they were teaching you science for at least 12 years?
If everyone believed I would blame the schools, if 1% belive, its time to blame the willfully ignorant for being willfully ignorant. Joe rogans has just pointed out that flat earthers are at best willfully ignorant, and at worst very dumb. and thats Eddie B's best mate!
How do you take personal responsibility for being "dumb"? My head hurts trying to wrap around the contradictions in that statement.
and american history teachers, because of the legend of christopher columbus. it's not our public schools, it's eddie.
The route of Christopher Columbus is still possible in flat earth "theory", but I get your point. So, what is it about Eddie that makes him impervious to any amount or, more importantly, any quality of education? Is he genetically stupid and gullible, or is there an environmental factor other than the education system he went through that explains his beliefs for you?
Plenty of scientists smoke weed. Joe Rogan smokes it like a chimney and doesn't believe in flat earth. Plenty of people who believe in wacko conspiracies do not smoke weed. I'm not sure we can lay the blame for flat earthers on cannabis.
What's a "truther" in this context? I've not heard that term. Me, neither, because going the other way, the flat-earthers and "we didn't land on the moon" people I've known in the flesh, as distinct from on a computer screen, never smoked. I admit, though, that my sample pool is very, very small. Something went amiss somewhere, but I wouldn't say the answer is more science. I'd say the answer is more mathematics. Science itself doesn't necessarily train a person to think better, particularly at the high school level (ages 14-18), because there's so much rote memorization. But math, though -- that's almost entirely raw thinking, with only a little bit of rote memorization. :dunno: Just my opinion.
my opinion only, because i'm not mr. spocking his brain: i think it's hubris more than anything. look, it's incredibly humbling to figure anything out. it's incredibly humbling to ask questions, research any topic, put in the work to hypothesize and observe a test. along comes this fool that thinks he's figured it all out because...."nasa dot gov". it's hubris for anyone to think they've figured anything out. if he wasn't so arrogant, then he could have easily taken the time to create a hypothesis and conduct an experiment. but that would mean he's got to learn about geometry, physics, math, and possibly spacetime (but i know i'm asking a lot ) sure, arguably great grappler.
