Can't assign morality to a person without morals. Money is the only motivator. Morality can only ever oppose the desire to accumulate inordinate amounts of wealth, not support it.
There's no problem if the people in charge are receiving personal stipends to do this shit. There are a lot of hyper wealthy people that have the kind of money that can do that, that stand to gain even more wealth by making the bribe. See it as an investment.
Even controlled opposition is better than no opposition, imo. Currently it is all just a bunch of decentralized gatherings of people coping and seething but not doing any kind of...anything, really.
Treat the initiative with healthy scepticism, but keep an open mind. If it goes wrong, you lose nothing. If it goes right, mainstream counterculture has finally gotten a foothold. Win-win.
It's literally just motivated by money. Occam's razor. No need to think about obscure sub-plots. It all comes down to accumulating more and more wealth.
My trust in this announcement is very low, but I'm plenty willing to see how it pans out. Even if his platform is just another moneymaking scheme, two bad competing platforms is still better than one monopoly.
I dunno, seems a little complicated for a class of elites that can't otherwise keep anything secret, out of pure hubris.
If the medical data is faked, why don't their numbers show a low rate of infection? Wouldn't that push their narrative a lot better than a high rate of vaccination but equally high infection rate?
So are the isrealites getting a different shot, or are the Jews killing the jews, too?
You stop standing with Taiwan, you lose your microchips.
A moment of clarity? Color me impressed.
Grasping at some real straws now, buddy.
Because the human brain likes to see patterns where there are not any.
I can't tell you off the top of my head just how far it'd have to be to make a visible difference.
On the topic of Newton, though, it was a theory in his time, but after years upon years of his math checking out, one can start taking it as fact. Gravity has been proven to affect both light, time and even space, which we previously thought were immutable constants.
Also, a scientific 'theory' and a hypothesis are often confused. Theories are (as far as I'm aware) accepted as fact, whereas hypotheses are not.
Of course. When things are too far off, they become 'too small' to see. This and a ship dipping behind the horizon aren't mutually exclusive, but they also aren't the same thing. A ship can be behind the horizon partially. Looking at it through binocs doesn't magically cause it to 'resurface', if you will. As far as I'm aware, light doesn't curve around the earth in any meaningful way. (Earth's gravity has a miniscule effect on light's trajectory)
baseless claim, followed up by shifting burden of proof
Classic.
You can do this literally any day a ship is out at sea. From shore.
They totally could today. That astronaut is a dumbass. The reason we don't go to the moon is because there's no point in doing it. The means of landing on the moo.are exactly the same as on earth, and that shit is done almost every day. And the atmosphere on earth makes landing on earth Harder.
Eh. People don't often get struck by lightning, but there's people that get struck multiple times throughout their life.
I'd sooner chalk this up as statistical anomaly than anything. I'm glad it's happened to a public figure, though. Much harder to have a de from the public eye.
At least the guy is sharing the results of tests he's conducted, himself, rather than make baseless claims. Radiowaves function just fine in a vacuum, and you can find out for yourself with a fifty dollar setup. That not worth confirming your suspicions that everything NASA told earth over the past eighty years is bullshit?