Hacker News Reader

> It makes them less likely to admit they were wrong.

I'd venture that someone who believes in a flat earth - despite an abundant array of evidence which doesn't require advanced science or abstract thought to interpret - has already passed the point of no return and they're either 1) horribly deluded and only therapy can help them or 2) a grifter and nothing will get them to change their stance as long as they can milk it.

> calling people names

At some point, there isn't anything else you can do but call someone "deluded" or "deceptive". If you knew someone who went outside every day and said the sky was neon green[1], despite all the evidence and your entreaties, you'd soon give up and retreat to one of those two positions, no?

[1] I'm hoping there's no medical condition which transposes colours in a synaesthesic-type fashion. But that would be obvious in other situations...

> At some point, there isn't anything else you can do but call someone "deluded" or "deceptive". If you knew someone who went outside every day and said the sky was neon green[1], despite all the evidence and your entreaties, you'd soon give up and retreat to one of those two positions, no?

You can walk away. Name calling isn't the default stance.

There's sincerely wrong, and there's still-marketing-'theories'-proven-wrong-by-your-own-experimental-design >4 years later. Does this absolutely prove h's a grifter? No, but it's a decent heuristic.

There are a lot of scammers and con artists in public life nowadays. The internet has sadly made it really easy for them to monetize. Whereas previously cranks and con artists could make some pocket money peddling newsletters through small ads, it's much easier today to parlay that sort of interest into a fandom that provides significant revenue. This is kind of a problem, summarized in the truism 'those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.'

I'm all for giving people the benefit of the doubt, but when someone is very savvy in marketing and self-promotion area, the probability that they're just struggling with a cognitive blind spot gets lower and lower with time. If you can never admit the possibility or probability that someone else is dishonest, then you are a sucker.

Speaking of atrocities, what's your take on the military industrial complex conspiracy theory?

MIC isn't so much a conspiracy theory but rather a complex set of perverse consequences when involving military equipment production for the US. Take for example that much of the production of complex equipment like planes or tanks are split up across the entire US. It's not just a cost saving measure of sub-contracting but that it also gives the primary contractor the power over representatives as they can spread rumors of a given production facility coming to X district or out of that district. It makes it painful for said representatives to vote no against a costly military contract even if from the point of view of the DoD it has no benefit for them (this has happened a few times iirc). It's not some sinister cabal that comes up with these plans, it's just a sound business practice when dealing with government contracts.

Question: are you expessing your opinion, or describing reality as it is?

If the latter: what information source(s) have you used to acquire these alleged facts, and how did you go about fact checking them (for example: things that may go on that you have no way of acquiring knowledge about)?

Personally: I think there is an even bigger (potential) conspiracy going on that underlies all of this: educational curriculum (both what's included and what isn't) in Western nations.

I mean, if the person in question is under 15 and has never picked up a physics textbook, then mocking someone that believe in flat earth is out of the question.

And there is plenty of room to allow people to change their position, to test science via hypothesis and measurement.

But when a person is a speaker at flat earth conferences telling people that science lies to them about everything, they just might be a charlatan. I believe the movie 'Behind the Curve' covers this, but must admit to not having watched it. From the synopsis of the movie the flat earthers perform experimentation proving the earth is a globe, then discard the evidence never to bring it up again. So yes, if this is the case, the tone is demanded.

He certainly isn't being very complementary to NASA in this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8p2JC6788I

Most of these guys sell merch to the gullible - make money by speaking at conferences - sell books etc. Given that he is making money by defrauding people with something he likely does not even believe himself - grifter might be an appropriate term.

Nobody is under any obligation to treat confidently wrong morons with kid gloves. If they’re raising money based on obvious lies, it helps nobody but the grifters to dance around the fact.

There’s this weird HN obsession with high minded Aristotlesque norms of inquiry when the plain fact is that these people lie for money and do actual damage in the process. cf every Covid “doctor” selling garlic / HCQ / IVM / whatever else will make them millions of dollars.

> I just don't like the tone of mocking and condescension

Isn't it interesting? You'd think that tone would come more from the "flat-earth" side, but as I've gotten older I have noticed the most vehement opinions come from globe-earth side. It's like an antibody response to a virus.

Just take a look at the comment at the bottom of this thread, flagged and downvoted for _entertaining_ the idea that globe earth may be an illusion of perception. The Agent Smith effect [https://i.redd.it/dlhfz4az7oh41.jpg] is real, and this is a perfect example of it in the wild.

I agree with you, although he's had four years to start changing his mind and all he's done is delete his video?

At the risk of sounding blunt: this point is irrelevant towards his being a “grifter” or not.

He attempts to separate hapless fools from their money by making films that advance his demonstrably false claims.