Have we always been so stupid, or is this a recent development?
We're the stupidest and least capable that it's possible to be to develop all this tech in the first place, because if we weren't, we'd have done it sooner.
IIRC it took us until Blaise Pascal or Fermat to realise the probability distribution of flipping two coins isn't 1/3 HH, 1/3 TT, and 1/3 a heads and a tails.
Witch hunts on spectral evidence was a thing.
I've heard 12th century european sailors sometimes thought that compasses were devilish.
This assumes a linear and only-forward progression of technology, which just isn't true.
That said, it's an interesting way to look at things.
Consider: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycon
> When the people gathered in the marketplace of Abonutichus at noon, when the incarnation was supposed to occur, Alexander produced a goose egg and sliced it open, revealing the god within. Within a week, it grew to the size of a man with the features of a man on its face, including long blond hair. At this point, the figure resembling this description was apparently a puppet that appeared in the temple. In some references, Glycon was a trained snake with a puppet head.
p.s. I only know this because I received a secret drop from the Q...
On the topic of conspiracies I thought that was often around the HAARP weather monitoring program vs radar transmitters. Another set of conspiracy theories are cloud seeding programs and those indeed cause lawsuits due to flooding, mismanagement or alterations of water supplies and concerns of silver iodide and potassium iodide getting into farm animal food supplies. The only concern that makes sense to me is modification of where it rains and that is not much different than altering river flow with dams to steal water from a county or city or state.
A game I like to play is to place a bet on what percentage of a conspiracy theory will turn out to be true and if for the right or wrong reasons. It is especially interesting for me to see how different crowds respond to them before and after any semblance of validation.
And:
> “The group referred to the NEXRAD system towers as ‘weather weapons,’ and claimed there were no laws preventing American citizens from destroying the ‘weapons,’” the email states.
So, wait, if I declare something to be a weapon, does that mean that there is no law against me destroying it? Or do these guys think they're the only ones who get to do that?
aaronbrethorst•9mo ago