/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

Privatise everything.

>>104138
NASA is still useful for mapping out the outer solar system.

Exactly Thank you!D
What is NASA Never A Straight Answer (Sorry I had to.) hiding from us?
The main stream media preps the sheeples consciousness so that they more easily accept what they are told. About the moon landing, one of my sources said that they faked the footage probably in one of Walt Disney's studio. Due to the solar radiation the film in the camcorder would suffer from overexposure so we won't be seeing nothing but whiteness. But did they land on the moon, and fake the footage?

>a conspiracy video from a literal flat earth, creationist, and genocentrist channel
Anon, stay away from this bullshit. It makes me lose faith in this site to see this. The first point is literally the broadcast becoming glitched. You can see it because the object right next to them is also glitched. NASA streams do this all the time, and it's always pretty much technical. Broadcast TV before digital would do this all the time. Even after. The second one about bubbles is debris getting into the way of the camera. This is the type of phenomenon that sometimes makes people mistake video footage to contain ghosts. And, the rest is just tripe.

>>104151
You speak truth, flat earth is bullshit
>>104138
My problem is no one else wants space for science and shit, so who is gonna send probes?

>>104153
Private space exploration hasn't evolved past tourism and pet projects. The greatest example SpaceX still only works in mostly developing space technologies. Which flights are few and so far have been tests. Although the company is ambitious, it still is best a contractor like its peers.
If you consider the funding of NASA in fact, it might as well be under-funded when dwarfed by the expansive spending of American welfare.

>>104151
I had a feeling he might be a flat-earther still it is uncertain. He had a good message tho', question authority. Any good points made shouldn't be dismissed just because he is a alleged flat-earther. The truth is the truth even if it come from a Jew. Let us not jump unto steadfast conclusions.

>>104158
Yes, but let's not accept questionable sources. I in fact would take the word of a Jew over this channel, such as the authors of The Bell Curve, however that's because they're academic. Let me give you a example that can compare to this video; if I gave you a video about how great Pol Pot was by a YouTube channel called "Socialist Union Channel", would you accept it? Probably not. We do this all the time on /mlpol/ when someone dismisses CNN or Washington Post despite their credibility. All sources deserve scrutiny, and a source with weak foundations deserve the most scrutiny. Which is why I watched this video, and caught what I saw as misinformation instead of just dismissing it for coming from a flat earther channel. There is little to assume that this is truth. Frankly if you tell you me that the merit is the message of questioning authority, then it would be right to assume that you are just seeking confirmation bias. I don't think there are any good points. And, I believe we should move on from shaky conspiracies.

>>104161
>then it would be right to assume that you are just seeking confirmation bias. I don't think there are any good points.
It is always good to question a person with great power, comparing a person with a government don't you think, he wasn't completely wrong about everything. anyone's can be wrong, just as anyone can be right in some matters. I'm not sure how I'm displacing confirmation bias. Am I not being reasonable? info is just info it can be fact or fiction. Whenever dealing with information if you want to be logical it is important to eject one's beliefs & biases. That's the only way one can concord with reality. Any how check out this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XacevWeOkHg
I must add that the interviewer is a pretentious jerk, whom loves his slavehood.

>Yes, but let's not accept questionable sources.
I have a perfect ensample for you, in which this believe puts you at a loss, if memory doth serve right before the Mandalay bay shooting someone told some people at the The Route 91 Harvest festival that they would all be dead. is that not a questionable source (I believe it was a women who said that)? do you get the point? Maybe I gave a to extreme ensample oops.

>>104131
>Flat earther
Remove yourself from the gene pool.

>>104131
I know you live upside down compared to the rest of the world, but that's no reason to become a flat-earther.

Commit a homicide on yourself please.

They are trying to understand the universe, it's good for our mental health, don't worry about it.

>>104237
NASA is hiding things from us.

>>104169
You responded to me at late hours, Anon. You should really get better sleep (unless you live in Alaska.)
>I have a perfect ensample for you, in which this believe puts you at a loss, if memory doth serve right before the Mandalay bay shooting someone told some people at the The Route 91 Harvest festival that they would all be dead. is that not a questionable source (I believe it was a women who said that)? do you get the point? Maybe I gave a to extreme ensample oops.
That was that 4chan post before the shooting, I believe. I remember it, and I honestly not phased by it. Q Anon was also apart of that whole conspiracy as well, and he later was posited as a disinfo agent. Whether or not he is, I think that has been put up to personal investigation by a few anons. And, I will tell you that there are many disinfo agents on 4chan. Hundreds of more on YouTube! Either due to negligence or intentional malice, so YouTube and the milquetoast conspiracy theorists are completely negligible to me. Get actual data.
It's not so much bias, but the insincerity of working under a presumption as truth. There is good info and there is bad info, there's no pussyfooting around it. Your evidence is bad. Being apologetic about bad information is shamefully offputting. If you can't simply dispel the lack of credibility, or at least tell me what are the good points at face value without resorting to sophism, then I have to say you are being unreasonable. Maybe illogical. Also, you didn't deny that ODD TV is genocentric and creationist.
On the video itself, Gary McKinnon strikes me as a ploy in a limited hangout. Escaping extradition, the amount of government offers, plus the general positive media press that surrounded him are all red flags. Take that he used the common psyop of UFOs and aliens as motivation for his actions (which the closest truth to free energy is detailed here >>>/vx/750 → as probably plasma magnetohydrodynamic propulsion) as well his lawyer Karen Todner who is associated with black hats (one of the groups actually had members cooperate with the FBI) which are traitorous, untrusworthy agents, commonly linked to gov't agencies. Although, that may be my presumption. Testimonies can be questioned at heart. McKinnon is unreliable. Especially when asked about evidence, he skirts around the issue by saying he didn't save any. Despite that he could have. His account is only a third hand source. And, what he does say of any importance is the Disclosure Product, which is just a convention. A convention whose bulk of evidence is testimonies again. Take note about the end of the interview. He is full of regret, shows compliance, and has admitted that he should be tried. He never was though. There's a shadow of doubt.
>>104471
I would be inclined to take your word if only you had at least second hand sources. I actually am open to debate about NASA, however the bar is higher than this. I suggest you read the thread I linked above. I have shown interest in the past about secret technology and ufos.

>>104492
Disclosure Project*
And, also why would he need to go through security to find something detailed in a book? Why hasn't he said what actually is there?

>>104492
All I'm saying is that Question authority is a good message.
Your response is quite complex, I'll make a proper response later if I have the time.
I am genuinely interested into figuring out what is the actual reality.
Also How are you sure that Q Anon is a disinfo agent? What if disinfo agents discredit him so that we pay him no mind.
What if everything we know is wrong, but of course we must assume we are right in order to get somewhere sorry I'm not articulating with the best of clarity I'm tired. I'm curious what is your belief system? put one's mind so to speak out there helps one intellectually develop, thanks for the feedback.

>>104594
>What if everything we know is wrong, but of course we must assume we are right in order to get somewhere sorry I'm not articulating with the best of clarity I'm tired. I'm curious what is your belief system? put one's mind so to speak out there helps one intellectually develop, thanks for the feedback.
I'm sure there's been a lot about the matter of truth in itself, and I remember reading into it. It gets so intricate as to define what is a chair and what is not a chair for example. That's Hegel I'm speaking about by the way. Who I will take his dialectic method as actually the basis of argumentation, and I hope you do too, being: thesis, antithesis, then synthesis. That's how I saw our exchange here. On friendlier terms, I hope it that you see that I'm just providing an antithesis to your evidence and not the topic as a whole. I would be open to reinterpretation.
QAnon is an odd one. I have no idea if he might be, but the point about him is tangential at best. There is an anon here who I trust that has said word about him before, and he often goes back and forth with this flagfag Vril on that thread right there. I might trust him more than QAnon and 4chan as a whole since it seems to be an intellectual mine site.
It's hard discerning truth, but I still prefer academia despite my startling worldview. All in all the reason why is because I want to be taken seriously if I ever bring anything up. I very well believe that the rigour of academics can at least be tried. Speaking of which, I probably won't tell you what my belief system is. It's better not to in my opinion for the sake of the argument. I'll leave it to the Hegelian bits for clues though.

>>104153
not only it's bulshit but it's a huge troll which purpose remains to put a huge discredit on every conspiracy research or serious topic.

Flat earth creationists and anti NASA, people who pretend we never went to the moon are really left wing trolls.

I have studied in deep this kind of trolling for years, it comes with a lot of psychology and understanding, of manipulation.

it began in the early 80s from some left wing university professor who decided to bury the heritage of Nixon, and pretending the moon landing were faked because all of this was a scheme to pretend the USA never went there, and the communists never lost any space race.

The truth is, soviets watched closely the takeoffs of the lunar rockets., sent probes on the moon before Apollo, exchanged data between the NASA and even applauded the success of the moon missions. Americans brought a commemorative plaque on the Moon with a statue in the memory of space pioneers. most of them were russians.

so yes, this kind of brainless left wing conspiracy theories ARE conspiracies themselves, to shit on the greatest accomplishments of mankind.

also, one of the reason today the "moon hoax theory"is becoming so popular is simple: back in the 60's there was NO diversity or ethnic quotas in the development and the domain of rocket science. there was primitive computers that managed to get the job done right.

now the technology is stagnating, we have no fusion reactor, we have no more space shuttle, we have no more supersonic transport, no more industry, but we have smartphones made in china that allows a random mongol to buy dankest memes apps on the internet, and believe this kind of social justice bullshit to get their opinion even more on the side of their own destruction.