• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Can you prove that the Space is real?

The bolded never really convinced me. Let’s assume we are simulated. Our observable universe could be tiny compared to the “real” universe. Second, we don’t know what the physics of the real universe are like. Maybe their reality isn’t “quantized” like ours. Third, even if the real universe is exactly like ours, the programmers wouldn’t have to mimic it atom for atom to make it a useful model. Perhaps the finer details only rasterize when beings in the simulation look at them. Just like when I play a video game, the game only shows me what I need to see at any given moment.

Also, we only perceive a tiny portion of what our senses take in. Our sensory data is processed WAY down before it is presented as "reality" to our consciousnesses.

So a simulation would only require the "shorthand" version we get anyway.

Also playback only or interactive would make a huge difference.
 
Everyone always scoffs and makes humor of those who are open to the simulated reality theory, and it probably doesn't help that the University of Oxford suggests that "even just to store the information about a few hundred electrons on a computer, one would require a memory built from more atoms than there are in the universe." However, notable astrophysists who are actually notorious for dispelling silly theories have actually came forward and asserted it's very likely that we could be the simple yet complex complex creation of a being we're not familiar with, with the intelligence of which would leave us drooling over ourselves like brain-dead half-bred monkeys in comparison. We share the majority of our DNA with monkeys, and what the course of evolution had produced (humans) wouldn't be enough if the Darwin theory is correct.

Not to mention, there's a clear pattern throughout history with Russia that we've always had. We've always tried to best them at everything and the moon was no exception. The friction and competitive haste between our two countries are still the same to this very day. There are several different notable people with reputable backgrounds who believe the moon landing was actually a hoax as well.

As far as where to draw the line on only believing what you can see, I think it's very important to ALWAYS remain a particular level of skepticism about almost anything. Not limited to just history either. Hell, if it wasnt for people like Christina Hall, we'd be ALL easily manipulated into conforming to our society in the exact way that those in control would want us to. It's happening vastly, but if that was actually happening in whole and not in part, well.. you get the picture...

I always admired those who read texts from history books and learn to question it. Oftentimes the source comes from a distorted reality of what actually happened. Something as simple as our own American history is notorious for false accounts and distorted renditions being taught in schools as fact, only to misinform our youth. Sometimes the history books we read are nothing more than propaganda.

Shifting the focus over towards European history, and most historians wouldn't dare tell you that Hitler is arguably the most lied about people throughout the entire timeline of human history. Even the most honest historians who know this would never dare acknowledge it because of the unwarranted shunning and scornful criticisms that would ensue. All of the outlash would make it appear as if they were attempting to assert Hitler was one of the greatest human beings on the planet, but simply asserting truths and critiquing what has already been deemed as fact is that in itself, enough to shake your head at.
Is this a pro-Hitler Stormfront statement?
 
Is this a pro-Hitler Stormfront statement?

It was a long winded comment...but...where did you get that? Was that sarcasm? Because if so...that was well played and quite funny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom