Could there be something to whatever the argument being made here is? Maybe. But I have to grok it by watching 20-min of an absolute gish gallop of jargon that I can only assume is meant to mesmerize the observer. The speaker proceeds through the slides at a very fast pace, and at no point does he take time to really connect the words he is saying with the visual imagery he is using. In other words, he takes it for granted that you know a huge amount of the 'lore' that subtends his whole method.
In the case that there is something substantive in his argument, would I benefit from dedicating myself to the sort of research it would require to understand the conversation at the pace in which it is occuring in the video? Maybe.
But that's a big maybe. Of course, I could devote all of that time to studying these things and discover that, indeed, this video was nothing but a gish gallop of one pile of dogshit after another.
It seems unreasonable to expect busy people to do this. The people creating this content need to make arguments (via video) that are as clear as they possibly can be, even if this requires making a series of videos, or at least pointing the viewer to the sufficient resources pre-requisite for understanding the argument. But being as clear as possible is clearly not their intent.
Instead, what you get is a blitz through a bunch of jargon-laced sentences at the pace of those two black girls who just flap their mouths to win debates, just without all of the heavy breathing.
If you want someone to think it is worthwhile to give their time and energy to understanding you, then find a way to simplify the argument into logical atoms. Give me the premises. Let me see the basic logical structure of the argument and how you are inferring the conclusion from the premises. Then I can decide whether it's worth getting into the more technical details.
As it stands, flat-earthers tend to do the gish gallop, and they throw these kinds of videos around like tokens, probably not understanding them at all themselves. But they sound so technical and erudite. . .it's like, if you're going to get in a big brawl, it feels better to be standing next to the big guy, right? That's kind of the psychology here. You guys throw videos around like this because it looks good, and you can feel like you did something meaningful when nobody responds.
You've just described the explanations for why and how the earth is 'flat'.
The main goal of the flatter is to troll people into thinking the 'flatter' really believes the earth is 'flat', and to take them seriously enough to argue with them about their supposed 'crazy belief'.
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 0 points 10 monthsAug 4, 2024 10:50:33 ago (+2/-2)*
In the case that there is something substantive in his argument, would I benefit from dedicating myself to the sort of research it would require to understand the conversation at the pace in which it is occuring in the video? Maybe.
But that's a big maybe. Of course, I could devote all of that time to studying these things and discover that, indeed, this video was nothing but a gish gallop of one pile of dogshit after another.
It seems unreasonable to expect busy people to do this. The people creating this content need to make arguments (via video) that are as clear as they possibly can be, even if this requires making a series of videos, or at least pointing the viewer to the sufficient resources pre-requisite for understanding the argument. But being as clear as possible is clearly not their intent.
Instead, what you get is a blitz through a bunch of jargon-laced sentences at the pace of those two black girls who just flap their mouths to win debates, just without all of the heavy breathing.
If you want someone to think it is worthwhile to give their time and energy to understanding you, then find a way to simplify the argument into logical atoms. Give me the premises. Let me see the basic logical structure of the argument and how you are inferring the conclusion from the premises. Then I can decide whether it's worth getting into the more technical details.
As it stands, flat-earthers tend to do the gish gallop, and they throw these kinds of videos around like tokens, probably not understanding them at all themselves. But they sound so technical and erudite. . .it's like, if you're going to get in a big brawl, it feels better to be standing next to the big guy, right? That's kind of the psychology here. You guys throw videos around like this because it looks good, and you can feel like you did something meaningful when nobody responds.
[ + ] GetFuckedCunt
[ - ] GetFuckedCunt [op] 1 point 10 monthsAug 4, 2024 16:51:17 ago (+1/-0)
Why dont you adress the issues brought up in the video? The horizon is optical, not physical.
[ + ] Sector2
[ - ] Sector2 -1 points 10 monthsAug 4, 2024 14:39:59 ago (+1/-2)
You've just described the explanations for why and how the earth is 'flat'.
The main goal of the flatter is to troll people into thinking the 'flatter' really believes the earth is 'flat', and to take them seriously enough to argue with them about their supposed 'crazy belief'.