I'm no scientist and my main curiosity is the time travel. If one could tap in I imagine it would go exactly like that, returning to your past to recalibrate your future, giving signs you know would work because it's a personal investment.
I hear you. Time travel can be cool to think about but I think it is difficult for a movie to do it well. In my experience, movies generally (1) try too hard to explain the physics of how they are time traveling and (2) allow for so much freedom in the time travel that the plot becomes amorphous. In all seriousness, using a DeLorean with 1.21 gigawatts (mispronounced "jiggawats" of course) might be the best explanation for time travel of any movie.
But overall, I think my objection to Interstellar was that it was shilled in liberal circles as this "physically accurate movie that used real theoretical physicists as consultants." Its "physics" was about as realistic as Star Wars. I mean, the worm hole is "behind Saturn"? What does that even mean? It follows Saturn's orbit around the sun, but it doesn't orbit Saturn itself like all the moons and rings do? I guess since we have never seen a worm hole, no one can say for sure that this makes no sense...
So I think it is just a matter of interest and philosophy. SwampRanger is more interested in Sci Fi from that perspective it seems. Mostly as it functions as a morality and even religious allegory. So I understand that. My issue is that I love math and science so these movies always drive me bonkers.
I think OP's point in this post was making fun of the "believe science" people, who are generally liberals. OP disputes the globe model of the earth, I know this because he told me. He may be surprised to read this, but when it comes to posts like this one here, I actually agree with his main position. I.e., that people nowadays just "believe science." The reason why I have given the flat earthers much more time than I should have was because in my opinion, there should be nothing wrong with challenging the globe model or anything else in science. My problem is that most of these people have already made up their minds. They dispute the globe and there is no evidence that can sway them. But I like the challenge of flat earth theory, just like I like to hear why the moon landing was actually impossible.
I am sure that most of my liberal friends who loved Interstellar will never watch a flat earth documentary and work through their arguments one by one. Fundamentally, when they answer the FE argument that the oceans should fly off the ball that "they don't because of gravity," they are fitting exactly what FE people accuse them of. Because none of them can actually calculate what the centrifugal effect is at the equator.
Thanks for your input, I wish I was more advanced with math and science but I do find it fascinating and love thinking about the possibilities. Your arguments and viewpoints are very welcome with me.
I hadn't thought about the politics in the movie or how it was received, I really like any time travel possibilities tho.
SwampRanger is more interested in Sci Fi from that perspective it seems.
Almost. I think I was being a bit sarcastic too. Unironically, Interstellar is so bad that it works better if you totally change the genre and pretend it's e.g. a Bollywood attempt at Hindu evangelism, with occasional input from Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar to make it sound more honest.
Less unironically, I've noted most time travel movies aren't about time travel at all but about multiverse bifurcation. The plot is trying to make a point that doesn't care if the time travel makes sense (e.g. Looper). Star Trek: TNG would routinely have a separate team of plot writers and tech consultants, and when the plot writers wanted something to force the characters to act a certain way they'd just leave a slug in the script for the tech team to fill in as they saw fit, and then the techs would invent something mostly consistent for Geordi to say that was both transparent-sounding and opaque at the same time. (I think the franchise jumped the shark about when Kirk and McCoy climbed onto Spock who had the only pair of gravity boots and they turned them into upward jets and then shot past a whole series of numbered decks that the Enterprise never really had before, including two that had the same number because the same shot made it into the final cut twice.)
So, with total irony, bite my tongue because planted firmly in my cheek, the link was when my office was first authorized to disclose how time travel really works, and was received quietly as the Rangers intended. (checks watch) The second disclosure hasn't gone out yet.
What does that even mean?
Exactly. That's also the slogan of c/FlatEarth because "even" is a pun.
Your "disclosure of time travel" looks interesting but I can't read all that tonight. I'll have to come back to it. I don't want you to dox yourself, but what exactly is your "office" if it cleared you to disclose how time travel works?
I am having a hard time figuring you out. Are you a flat earth person, or did you run that board as an experiment?
The office is SwampRangers.com. I tell people here I volunteer for Scott Lively. I larp as the guy with the eyepatch.
Yeah, some of my boards are experimental; in this case I want to hear from flat earthers same as you. For that purpose, my alt is a flat earther, he has it all worked out except for that last equation ....
I'm no scientist and my main curiosity is the time travel. If one could tap in I imagine it would go exactly like that, returning to your past to recalibrate your future, giving signs you know would work because it's a personal investment.
I hear you. Time travel can be cool to think about but I think it is difficult for a movie to do it well. In my experience, movies generally (1) try too hard to explain the physics of how they are time traveling and (2) allow for so much freedom in the time travel that the plot becomes amorphous. In all seriousness, using a DeLorean with 1.21 gigawatts (mispronounced "jiggawats" of course) might be the best explanation for time travel of any movie.
But overall, I think my objection to Interstellar was that it was shilled in liberal circles as this "physically accurate movie that used real theoretical physicists as consultants." Its "physics" was about as realistic as Star Wars. I mean, the worm hole is "behind Saturn"? What does that even mean? It follows Saturn's orbit around the sun, but it doesn't orbit Saturn itself like all the moons and rings do? I guess since we have never seen a worm hole, no one can say for sure that this makes no sense...
So I think it is just a matter of interest and philosophy. SwampRanger is more interested in Sci Fi from that perspective it seems. Mostly as it functions as a morality and even religious allegory. So I understand that. My issue is that I love math and science so these movies always drive me bonkers.
I think OP's point in this post was making fun of the "believe science" people, who are generally liberals. OP disputes the globe model of the earth, I know this because he told me. He may be surprised to read this, but when it comes to posts like this one here, I actually agree with his main position. I.e., that people nowadays just "believe science." The reason why I have given the flat earthers much more time than I should have was because in my opinion, there should be nothing wrong with challenging the globe model or anything else in science. My problem is that most of these people have already made up their minds. They dispute the globe and there is no evidence that can sway them. But I like the challenge of flat earth theory, just like I like to hear why the moon landing was actually impossible.
I am sure that most of my liberal friends who loved Interstellar will never watch a flat earth documentary and work through their arguments one by one. Fundamentally, when they answer the FE argument that the oceans should fly off the ball that "they don't because of gravity," they are fitting exactly what FE people accuse them of. Because none of them can actually calculate what the centrifugal effect is at the equator.
Thanks for your input, I wish I was more advanced with math and science but I do find it fascinating and love thinking about the possibilities. Your arguments and viewpoints are very welcome with me.
I hadn't thought about the politics in the movie or how it was received, I really like any time travel possibilities tho.
Almost. I think I was being a bit sarcastic too. Unironically, Interstellar is so bad that it works better if you totally change the genre and pretend it's e.g. a Bollywood attempt at Hindu evangelism, with occasional input from Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar to make it sound more honest.
Less unironically, I've noted most time travel movies aren't about time travel at all but about multiverse bifurcation. The plot is trying to make a point that doesn't care if the time travel makes sense (e.g. Looper). Star Trek: TNG would routinely have a separate team of plot writers and tech consultants, and when the plot writers wanted something to force the characters to act a certain way they'd just leave a slug in the script for the tech team to fill in as they saw fit, and then the techs would invent something mostly consistent for Geordi to say that was both transparent-sounding and opaque at the same time. (I think the franchise jumped the shark about when Kirk and McCoy climbed onto Spock who had the only pair of gravity boots and they turned them into upward jets and then shot past a whole series of numbered decks that the Enterprise never really had before, including two that had the same number because the same shot made it into the final cut twice.)
So, with total irony, bite my tongue because planted firmly in my cheek, the link was when my office was first authorized to disclose how time travel really works, and was received quietly as the Rangers intended. (checks watch) The second disclosure hasn't gone out yet.
Exactly. That's also the slogan of c/FlatEarth because "even" is a pun.
Your "disclosure of time travel" looks interesting but I can't read all that tonight. I'll have to come back to it. I don't want you to dox yourself, but what exactly is your "office" if it cleared you to disclose how time travel works?
I am having a hard time figuring you out. Are you a flat earth person, or did you run that board as an experiment?
The office is SwampRangers.com. I tell people here I volunteer for Scott Lively. I larp as the guy with the eyepatch.
Yeah, some of my boards are experimental; in this case I want to hear from flat earthers same as you. For that purpose, my alt is a flat earther, he has it all worked out except for that last equation ....