"Natural Rock Formation"

submitted by EndlessSunflowers from i.imgur.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I agree, it is far from proof. As I said, I don't really care to convince people to believe in giants. I also realize that I was over-reacting. Thank you for being courteous, and not flippant.

I just can't trust videos, although I do use Youtube to help with learning other languages. I have to read something in twelve places before I come to trust anything of it, or I need to see it with my own eyes in person. So, some "conspiracy" stuff (like the Cabal) is quite easy to say exists because I've seen it. I've never seen giants hahah, and I'd have a hard time believing someone if they told me that they had. All we have are these old tales (everyone agrees they are only quasi-historical at best), sketchy newspaper clippings, unauthentic interviews with the likes of Steven Greer, and debatable archaeological finds with nincompoops jumping to conclusions right away.

Still, there is nothing to disprove giants, or water-dragons, so I can't compare the overall theory to things like flat-earth, or so on. I remain neutral, but with a large interest in keeping my bias in check. To be honest, I would rather believe that nothing like this ever existed, but I just don't feel like that has any merit. Things interacted with our ancestors, and they tried to tell their offspring about these things. It's foolish to scoff at these stories wholesale, but equally foolish to accept them wholesale.

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Remain skeptical with videos AND with other media too, just as on SaidIt, the Internet, books, etc. Video can be more emotionally manipulative with music or selective editing, but really it's not that different - in capable author's hands.

A dozen sources is a lot. I'd settle for less than half if they were sources from diverse viewpoints, preferably non-corporate, to triangulate on my own truths, often multi-faceted. With juxtaposing views you can determine what is bias or agenda and fill in the gaps with inconvenient truths from their opposition. Corporate media doesn't do that so much - and they rarely provide any meaningful context.

I have limits and limited time on Earth. I consider all myths to be like Santa. Nice and fun but fake until proven otherwise. People who push Flat Earth (nonsense), Big Foot (verifiabley debunked), and the Mandela Effect (so dumb) are wasting time and distracting. I've tried to ask them to provide 3 of their best and I've never had anyone come through. If anyone questions me I provide them with Corbett's Bill Gates, Big Oil x2, and the Plandemic II documentaries and could provide them countless more if that's not enough. Usually I have extras handy from within the week too.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I tend to lean towards what I can experience firsthand, which is a lot. I read a lot, too, to supplement any experience I discover. I didn't go to college because they wouldn't have ever shown me the good stuff. I like to read non-corporate sources, but a lot of these are older than America, so I have to sift through the BS the academics release. I have to triangulate between sources just like you, if not...well, you fall into your own bias. I have done this.

I understand your views on limited time on Earth and how that could change your perception of myths. That is fine, and respectable. It's basically an attitude of "I don't have the time to prove/disprove this, but if you can prove it to me, great." I do not live life that way in regard to myths and folklores and fairy tales (clear and discernible differences between all of these things, mind you) but I am not like most people. The closest folks I have met have been old folks of the diaspora, and unfortunately, some bohemians. My main problem with sourcing things is that I can only ever point to the fact that sources exist and are easy to find. If one link cannot bring someone into looking into things on their own, then I know that an older more experienced user will provide more varied links. I am not tech savvy, and have not saved anything except, surprise surprise, books and pdfs. Some of you guys are really good comparative analysts with legitimate conspiracies, I noticed this years ago on Reddit too. However, that was pre-Trump.