Do "flat earthers" believe that 1 + 1 = 2 ?
None of them are willing to go on the record with this simple question.
It seems like they are fucked either way:
If they say "yes", then they believe in the basis of all science; and therefor, "the brainwashing".
If they say "no", then ... well...lol... i mean.. if they don't believe 1 + 1 = 2 ... then... lol , riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight....
a) show me any "two" things that are equal...each "one" of them exists within a different position; hence being perceivable.
b) "does not" aka "doing nothing" also represents a suggestion (nothing) in ignorance of perceivable (everything). Show me "something" that does "nothing"? Try explaining to me in your own words the origin of "nothing"? Where did you got it from and why does it feel so easy to use no; not; none; nothing; nothingness?
wow you are really bending over backwards to avoid such a simple question. still no answer - just a challenge to produce two identical things. ...lol and then and definitional analysis of "does not".
hahahah you sound like Bill Clinton... "well... it depends on your definition of 'is'".
incredible.
1 + 1 = 2, by the way...
it's observational.
in one hand you have a pineapple.
in another hand you have a coconut.
someone asks: "how many hands do you have"
a flat earthers response is:
well.... first, prove to me that i am real.
#facepalm
bitch, you have TWO (2) hands. 1 hand holds a pineapple + 1 hand holds a coconut = 2 hands.
it's observational science.
folks, they will argue with you about - literally - anything.
QUEST, noun (Latin quaero, quaestus) - "the act of seeking". What if I resist the temptation to seek (want) what others suggest for response-ability to perceivable origin (need)?
Those within everything cannot define what "is" ; only adapt (perceiving) to what was (perceivable).
DEFINITE (having certain limits) - ATION (through action)...If alive (reaction) then limited in-between inception and death (enacting) aka temporary living within the ongoing process of dying.
In short...to be implies out of; within and in response to.
OBSERVO (to keep; hold) -ATION (through action)...that represents the choice of want (suggested) over need (perceivable). What one perceives represents ongoing inspiration; what other ones suggest represents temporary information.
In short...the many are tricked by the suggestions of the few to ignore the perceivable "moving" system (sound) for affixed brands (words) slapped onto the moving system.
Well; one coconut and one pineapple plus the one holding them and the one suggesting to count them. Still each one different from one another...not the same.
Ask yourself if the coconut and the pineapple are perceivable without the suggested brands "coconut" and "pineapple"? Next ask yourself if counting perceivable is "needed" or if others suggest you to "want" to count?
What if all represents one in energy? What if being ONE (perceiving) within ONEness (perceivable) represents self differentiation of whole (process of dying) into partial (living)?
Sleight of hand for those with eyes to see..."all for one and one for all" or "there can be only one"
How many EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power" could there be?
What came first...living or the process of dying to live within?
How could temporary existence within ongoing change prove itself to others?
"I am whatever you say I am; because if I wasn't; then why would I say "I am"? In other words...does one need to suggest to others that "I am" or does being already imply the who; where; what and why of existence?
Who has "two" hands? One has one left hand and one right hand. Mimicking each other (ambidextrous) requires ongoing effort to keep the differences alike...yet once again never the same.
SCI'ENCE, noun [Latin scientia, from scio, to know.] + KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists" aka perceivable inspiration. The parasitic few suggest scientism to tempt the many who ignore perceivable to understand (stand under) suggested information.
oh nice,,, i love the analysis paralysis bot - not dumb as fuck at all :)
Let's re-cap:
I ASKED A QUESTION:
1 + 1 = 2
True or False
FLAT EARTHER RESPONDS:
SUMMARY OF EVENTS:
...ok so... i asked "how many hands do you have", and the flat earther responds:
define: have, and prove to me that i exist
they are just trolls.
#enoughsaid
Your suggestion tempts other to ignore perceivable. Life isn't outcome oriented (a quest); but the resisting response to origin.
Those represent a rebranding of want vs not want reasoning over suggested information; which tempts one to ignore the need to adapt to perceivable inspiration.
Nature doesn't communicate true or false information; it moves everything as to communicate perceivable inspiration for adaptation.
Does "breathing" represents true or false...or does one need to adapt to being moved by breathing anyway? Does "breathing" require a label for anyone to be able to breathe?
a) where did I consent to the suggested label "flat earther"?
b) choice represents the response to perceivable balance; while being tempted to ignore this for suggested choices.
Temporary (living) cannot posses (have) within ongoing (process of dying)...only utilize while being alive.