Comments by "carcdg" (@callanc3925) on "Eddie Bravo - People Don't Believe in Conspiracies But Think We Live in a Computer Simulation" video.

"BUILDING"
1
@bushisback112 Probably got something to do with a lot of 911 conspiracy theorists saying dumb nonsensical and false information meanwhile elon musk is arguably one of the best thinkers of our generation and has a reputation for being that way. Reputation goes a long way towards trusting someone/something
1
@Boredaff Rogan understands the point hes just smart enough to realise that, like how theres no evidence we live in a computer simulation, theres no evidence that any people who dismiss all conspiracy theories also genuinely think were in a computer simulation
1
@SylasTheGreat What? If im making a simulation of a universe I want it to be as accurate and water tight as possible. Im trying to make a simulation of a universe not an easter egg.
1
@SylasTheGreat painfully obvious yet you cant think of one yourself?
1
@SylasTheGreat If its so painfully obvious that no one would need an example then it makes you look pretty stupid for saying it in the first place. You also make yourself look like a bit of a fuckwit when someone just asks you to justify what you said and you say "well i dont need to, its very obvious that what im saying is correct"
1
P W Even if it came down with thermite, how does that make it an inside job? Maybe the terrorists who hijacked the planes were also the people who set the thermite
1
P W firstly, how is anyone who wasnt either planning to do that or working security meant to know that. second, id like to see any solid evidence of there being thermite found at the site
1
P W Youre asking me how they would set the thermite. I dont fucking know. Same as how you dont know exactly how the government wouldve gone about setting the thermite. The only people who would potentially know that are people who work security at the WTC or are planning to set thermite there. The only evidence the 911 lawyers for truth people have for there being thermite is in a single paper which was published without the knowledge of the only editor/peer reviewer so thats a pretty bad source. there were also more metals involved in the fire than steel, for example aluminium and iron
1
P W A terrorist group could also have an inside hand in the security company, black cars going to the buildings could mean just about anything and why someone on the board of the security company that provides security staff to the wtc would suddenly change what their doing is beyond me? Was his security staff meant to be responsible for preventing planes from flying into the buildings? no. The only mention of thermite in the entire wikipedia page for 911 lawyers was in regards to the allegedly unbacked publishing of one paper. If you want to claim theres more forms of evidence go for it but im not finding them for you. although i love firefighters and think theyre heroes, I wouldnt entirely trust their ability to identify various molten metals by eye during an incredibly high stress moment. Dont think I would trust anyone to identify molten metals by eye in such a stressful moment tbh
1
P W The firefighter sure was talking afterwards, but everything he saw, every memory of the event was during. And even still it is entirely likely that he cant differentiate between different molten metals by looking at them. And yes wikipedia can be manipulated by anyone but at the same time if you manipulate any remotely sizeable wikipedia page the edit is often gone within a couple minutes if its obviously misinformation or the mass removal of information. Wikipedia doesnt solely rely on people not being cunts. I dont really see what youre trying to say with regards to mr bush not dropping what he was doing when informed of the attack The presidents brother being one of the board members of the company is a link to the government, its not a link to government intent. Also have you ever heard of the "six degrees of separation." Its the theory that everyone in the world is only 6 people (social connection wise) or less away from knowing anyone else in the world. The chances of someone involved in a terrorist organisation being able to get in close with any one of the many people working at that security company is not even remotely unlikely
1
P W Sorry I thought you meant the presidents brother was the one who didnt move from where he was, but at the same time its pretty public knowledge that george bush aint the smartest of blokes. And again, just because the government has a close friend that works at a security company isnt evidence of anything, its just a link. And yeah there probably wasnt any alumium used in the construction of the building but air planes are made of alumium
1
P W The planes disintegrated yes but that doesnt mean the alumium isnt there anymore... Its just in a lot of small pieces and a few larger ones. No liquid alumium at the pentagon because there wasnt a huge 7 floor fire heating up all the aluminium that got lodged in the building Yeah his brother being on the board is a reason to investigate, thats all. Not evidence that anything actually happened. If someone owns a lot of cigarettes, the fact a dairy got robbed 2 days ago isnt evidence that that person is a dairy robber. Honestly we cant speak for whatever their decisions are because we dont know what was going through their mind when they made them
1
P W I dont think you know what it means for something to disintegrate. The exact same volume of aluminium that was in the plane ended up more or less in the building. Just because its small pieces doesnt mean its not there. If it all melts and globs together it becomes much more noticeable that its there, and in fact the fact it was in a lot of small pieces means it wouldve melted more easily
1
P W your entire theory relies on the fact that not a lot of the plane wouldve made it in but your forgetting that every piece of metal had a large amount of momentum heading directly into a big shock and projectile absorber. Also the aluminium alloy used to make aircrafts it is vastly aluminium metal. My theory holds up as much as yours does mate
1
@trutherone1725 Actually theres pretty good evidence the universe is expanding, for example the red shifting of all light from distant galaxies
1
@OmegaMouse Computer programs use the laws of physics so that things become consistent. If we were in a simulation the laws of physics would still exist and would still be fixed and describe everything in our simulation/universe. Sure they could be changed at any time by the programmers but that doesnt change the fact that at the moment they are fixed and the analysis of them pretty easily debunks the idea of a flat earth. Theres also the fact that while theres no evidence for a simulation yet, theres also no evidence for any alternative. simulation theory is a thought experiment whereas there is a large bank of evidence against flat earth (and i suppose also some evidence for)
1
Rogan understands the point hes just smart enough to realise that, like how theres no evidence we live in a computer simulation, theres no evidence that any people who dismiss all conspiracy theories also genuinely think were in a computer simulation. Recognising that it is possible we live in a computer simulation also isnt the same as believing whole heartedly that we do.
1
Its commonly thought that regardless of whats found it, nothing will or should change about life because it will be just as meaningless as before but if we end up being able to create universe simulations of our own, then its almost impossible probability wise that we arent also in one
1
not really according to quantum mechanics
1
but then in quantum mechanics everything is probabilistic which can also be simulated
1
@sethcril actually there is, any picture taken from the moon or from mars or from the voyager space probes is far enough away to capture the entire earth, but youll just say "no those are all fake" because you dont have any evidence to back up what youre saying
1