You can point to the sky, and say, "Look, the Big Dipper is definitely a picture. There's no way that's on purpose. It points right to the North Star. If I can connect these dots into this picture, that must mean something."
But if we examine each individual star, you'd see that no, they have no relation to one another at all. They're very far away from each other. They aren't the same types of stars. They have nothing to do with each other.
But there are around 5,000 visible stars, and with that many data points, it's pretty easy to find pictures in them, if you're looking for them.
When you provide me with a complex and beautiful constellation, I can say, "that certainly does look like a ladle.
But there are thousands of other stars you're ignoring here because they aren't important to the picture you're trying to build. Why are you ignoring the stars outside of the ladle?
And if we look at each star in the constellation, we don't actually see anything unusual about these stars at all. Why did you choose these stars, besides the fact that they lined up in a way you thought was pretty?"
I'm not fleeing. I enjoy talking with you. I just have other stuff in my life going on than Q stuff, so I can't dedicate my life to responding to an entire sky full of stars for every post. I don't think that's unreasonable.
I really am sorry you feel that way. You provided me two different videos and asked my opinion on them.
I gave my opinion to you. One is a video from a professional embalmer who has no training to diagnose anything, and the other is from a Twitter user who calls herself an "elchemyst." Which, given the anti-Satanism attitude around here, I imagine should be setting off alarm bells with some GAW users.
My opinion is that these videos do not prove the thing they say they prove, because the evidence is not presented either by the videos themselves or implied by the credentials of the people talking.
I'm not sure what else to say. I'm sorry that you find that opinion idiotic, but I would encourage you to watch that video from the perspective of a nonbeliever.
A video of a non-expert agreeing with you isn't scientific evidence. It's not much better than a petition. These videos don't offer enough evidence to connect it with anything else. It's just a conclusion you like.
I am sorry that this analysis isn't the one you wanted.
You can point to the sky, and say, "Look, the Big Dipper is definitely a picture. There's no way that's on purpose. It points right to the North Star. If I can connect these dots into this picture, that must mean something."
But if we examine each individual star, you'd see that no, they have no relation to one another at all. They're very far away from each other. They aren't the same types of stars. They have nothing to do with each other.
But there are around 5,000 visible stars, and with that many data points, it's pretty easy to find pictures in them, if you're looking for them.
When you provide me with a complex and beautiful constellation, I can say, "that certainly does look like a ladle.
But there are thousands of other stars you're ignoring here because they aren't important to the picture you're trying to build. Why are you ignoring the stars outside of the ladle?
And if we look at each star in the constellation, we don't actually see anything unusual about these stars at all. Why did you choose these stars, besides the fact that they lined up in a way you thought was pretty?"
I'm not fleeing. I enjoy talking with you. I just have other stuff in my life going on than Q stuff, so I can't dedicate my life to responding to an entire sky full of stars for every post. I don't think that's unreasonable.
Take care.
I really am sorry you feel that way. You provided me two different videos and asked my opinion on them.
I gave my opinion to you. One is a video from a professional embalmer who has no training to diagnose anything, and the other is from a Twitter user who calls herself an "elchemyst." Which, given the anti-Satanism attitude around here, I imagine should be setting off alarm bells with some GAW users.
My opinion is that these videos do not prove the thing they say they prove, because the evidence is not presented either by the videos themselves or implied by the credentials of the people talking.
I'm not sure what else to say. I'm sorry that you find that opinion idiotic, but I would encourage you to watch that video from the perspective of a nonbeliever.
A video of a non-expert agreeing with you isn't scientific evidence. It's not much better than a petition. These videos don't offer enough evidence to connect it with anything else. It's just a conclusion you like.
I am sorry that this analysis isn't the one you wanted.
Good day to you too.
I have promised to do so.