The vsauce guy made an episode about Conformity in his Mindfield serie.
IIRC, they put one person to test in a group with 3 actors, then are shown a basic "Which line is longer?" test, were the answers were made to be as easy and obvious as possible. The one point however, is that everyone answer one at a time, with the test person being the last to answer (so he hears all the actors' answers first, then have to say his own).
For the first few tests, the actors and the test person answers all questions correctly. However, after a little while, all the actors start to give the same wrong answer. At this moment, the vast majority of people will actually give the same wrong answer, rather than go against the flow and say the right answer.
To me, this was an even better test, because it shows that people will willingly say something wrong, just to "fit in the group". It's not just doing something without reasons, it's actually lying and saying a different answer than what you know is true.
The donkey was created by God, not this AI. It also didn't try to explain the Word of God or anything close to that.
AIs like those LLMs are purely human-made. Tell me, are humans general good, or bad?
Furthermore, this AI is just being fed lines from various sources on the internet. Do you think the internet is mostly right, or mostly wrong and/or lying?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never seen any case anywhere where the Holy Spirit affects objects. It's only people. Therefor, why should we listen to AI that interprets the Bible, while it's impossible for it to have the Holy Spirit at all? The Holy Spirit is our guide to understanding the Word of God, being dependent of AI in such cases is replacing Him.
Could take on the punishment we deserved
He entered into our suffering
I still think an AI should never be allowed to use I or We (and related like "our").
An AI simply can't sin nor suffer (just like the Sun can't, it's a lifeless object), but they all use human-like self perception to trick the reader into thinking it's way more human and emotional than it actually is.
The answer is solid and true, of course, but don't get tricked by AI. It has no idea what it's actually saying. It's equivalent to a false priest reciting verses from the Bible, but without understanding them at all. Relying on it for your Bible readings and studies is incredibly dangerous.
That's simply because all those movies are filmed to make the resistance look absolutely good and perfect in every way, and the empire or whatever bad and evil in every way. The normies just side with whatever side the movie wants them to side.
There's also the "Real life is not a movie, it's more complicated!!" excuse.
Make a story where the villain is actually the good guy all along, most people won't get it and will blindly hate him because the movie told them he was the villain.
Vaccinated billions of people
"Very very very" low risk
Ok, what's the percentage? Very low risk could mean anything from like 1% to 0.000001%, so what is it? We're talking about billions of people, we need precise informations cause we're talking about potentially dozens of millions of people at risk of myocarditis.
The risk of Covid itself is greater than the vaccine
Except that has nothing to do with it. If someone has to go through a medical procedure, no matter if it's objectively the best thing to do, you have to warn them of ALL potential risks. Did you? No, you didn't. Everyone who did got censored, banned, or fired.
low risk of myocarditis among young men
You mean, the demographics that was, from the beginning, least likely to get hurt or killed by Covid anyway? So the ones who were the least in danger from the virus, were actually the most at risk with the vaccine supposed to counter said virus? And you see nothing wrong with that?
For me it's not the booster, it's the "It doesn't prevent covid, just lessen Covid and the symptoms" part. For people who claims to "Believe the science", they sure don't know a whole lot about "Immunity" and "Immune system".
"I just got covid but I'm thankful for the vaccine..."
That doesn't smell right especially with how CGI can save the costs of dozen's of movie sets.
The same stuff is happening in all industries. They save $1 because of budget cost, computer or AI generation, or off-loading some work to cheap countries like India, but then they multiply the marketing or other external cost by x10 the amount they saved.
In video games, even like 10 years ago, actual development was only like 20% of the actual cost of the game, the rest was management/marketing/etc. The ratio is probably higher nowadays.
Is there a single sentence from that post that's not full of hypocrisy? Let's find out:
-
"Yes book banning is bad: however [...]" ok well you already countered your own "moral" already. "I'm against this, except when it benefits me".
-
"Children have yet to develop critical thinking skills" So why are you telling them they may have 'the wrong body' or force them to use puberty blockers then, if they can't be sure of anything?
-
"Children do not stand a fighting chance" So why the fuck are you talking about sexual interactions to them, or making books purely targeted at them? At least the Bible is for everyone, it doesn't target kids only and tell them to "keep secrets from their parents".
-
"Give them a chance to live a life free from religious hatred, bigotry, division". Yeah, free from hatred and division, message written by the people who seek division and spills hate wherever they go. So inclusive, that if you don't agree with them, they will censor you, dox you then jail you.
-
"And help end the cult of the Abrahamic God and its sects" Cause you know, the people telling you to "Believe the Science" while also believing there are 1000 genders, clearly isn't a sect at all.
So you're going to play semantic and behave just like the left? Yes, coercion is force. You use force and domination to pursue the result you want, even if the person doesn't want that. Here's just some definitions I found for it, in case you're not convinced:
- to compel to an act or choice
- to achieve by force or threat
- to restrain or dominate by force
- the act of coercing; use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.
- involves compelling a party to act in an involuntary manner by the use of threats, including threats to use force against that party
- To restrain by force, especially by law or authority; to repress; to curb.
- To use force, threat, fraud, or intimidation in an attempt to compel one to act against their will.
Pick your favorite and argue all you want about "words", but I feel like a certain theme is emerging from all those definitions, don't you think? "Force" doesn't have to be you actually physically restrained, it's much more than that. If you have a family to feed, and your employer tells you "Jab or get out", that is using force.
But they are ignoring it, by simply saying "No one forced you". Yes, our choices were forced. Let's not blame the victims, even if they are still at fault partially, let's keep our focus on the true culprits behind all this.
I keep seeing this "No one forced you to take it, you always had a choice". Funnily enough, that was the whole argument of the pro-vax people during Covid. We used to make fun of them for that, but now we're using their very own words? What changed? Did I miss something?
I don't agree at all with that. Yes, people do force me to take if they threaten me to cut my liberties or my money that I need to live. I have the choice to kneel down or not, but that's still coercion, and they absolutely tried to force an answer. Those aren't mutually exclusive. People always have the choice and indeed complied with it, but let's not excuse nor ignore how tyrannic those mandates were. The people behind those are the real culprits.
Jabbed or Not, you should always always always believe that your life is in GOD and only GOD’s hands.
In a way, that's what made it so complicated to talk about it with my parents. We're Christians, but every time I told them why I was strongly against it, most of the time, they just resorted back to "God gave us science and gave us vaccine". I wasn't able to get through to them because of that, they had blind faith in vaccines, no matter where it came from, because they saw it as a gift from God.
I really wish I'd see someone finally prove once and for all the Earth is round by using holonomy, a side effect of curved spaces that increases an object rotation when its only moving in translations. This is possible on a sphere but impossible on a flat surface, and a purely mathematical concept (so no reliance on photoshopped pictures, or various kind of light pollution in the atmosphere, or weird optical illusion like on water). Determining whether or not holonomy is a thing on Earth will 100% prove if its a curved space or not.
My argument against flat Earth is that the shortest distance between two objects is a straight line except on a sphere. I have been in airplanes and they have always traveled in an arc.
A straight line on a sphere is called great circle distance. It's impossible to represent a sphere on a 2D piece without physical distortion in some way, so on paper, planes trajectory appears curved, but that's just a distortiong of their actual path. Planes don't really constantly turn in real life, they follow a mostly straight line whenever possible.
Our own people, when given direct evidence, don't even believe it.
And that's good that we're skeptical of everything, even blatant pictures. Last thing we need is jumping at the first conclusion we see and progressively turning into mindless sheep, seeing only stuff in pictures we want to see without analysing it in details or confirming with each others, and just progressively turn into NPCs, just in the opposite direction from the other NPCs.
If we just accept everything, we're opening a very big weakness that can easily be exploited just like other the mass is being exploited.
Also, this thread is now home to many more evidence of it due to people questioning and wanting more, can't say that's a bad thing.
When enough people in their lives stop interacting with them then MAYBE they’ll realize that nobody wants to be around their miserable existence.
That's the problem with the internet, no matter how crazy you are, you'll always find someone just as crazy as you. Those people will stay in their bubble, find other people, and progressively get crazier and crazier.
I'm not excluding either your theory, or the simple fact that our understanding of the world is completely wrong. Maybe carbon dating is not used correctly, or doesn't show what we expected, except we have nothing for now. In fact, I'm almost certain all of our theories are still wrong. And yes, time is very weird and more "fluid-like" than we think, so it's also a strong possibility. Time is related to space, but could very well be related to something like dark matter/dark energy, stuff that we've detected all over the universe but still are completely unable to understand.
France is a top consumer of anti-depressants. I really wouldn't call Europe "healthy" at all.