Hacker News Reader

Comment by jakeogh | Hacker News Reader

There are always people that actually believe it, but there are good reasons to suspect it's not entirely organic. If one made a list of times the "fake landing" thing was used, the vast _minority_ would be arguments agreeing with this skeptic; in reality, it serves a different purpose.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21170684

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21057230

View on HN

> The most effective way to prevent people from looking into something is to poison the well. Attach the thing to something else obviously false, bonus points if evokes a negative emotional response.

But then what is the end goal of all this? Anti-US propaganda?

To cause the desired effect. It's the most effective technique to stop people from looking at something. Consider why this purely technical, on-topic and perfectly NIST sourced comment was flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419760

screenshot: http://v6y.net/1592547475.screenshot.png

I assume it was flagged because unless you're already a true believer, "look! this falling building is falling according to the laws of physics" is not a very strong argument.

"Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact"

7 @ g for 2.25s is a verifiable fact from one of the most prestigious standards making bodies on the planet. There are tutorials on reproducing that NIST measurement.

You seem to be not surprised it's flagged, and you bring up belief. Why?

Believer of what? Argument of what?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com