Comment

Comment on Witness

And I would expect you to believe nobe of that without extraordinary proof, but the real difference is all the propaganda and active deception during the time.

You should believe literally nothing any government said during the cold war without external validation.

And don’t forget we live in a world with Flat Earthers, not everyone has seen that proof you take as self evidence.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Zron@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago
Okay, how about the fact that the Soviets congratulated the US on the first moon landing.

You know, the two opposite sides of the Cold War, and the other side admitted they were beaten?

That seems like pretty good proof

source
zalgotext@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Wait, which is it? I shouldn’t believe any extraordinary claim without extraordinary proof? Or just the ones that were made during the cold war? You still haven’t given your definition of “extraordinary” either. And how is a layman supposed to obtain “extraordinary proof”? Is “extraordinary proof” different from “external validation”?

What are you actually trying to say here? Because it sounds like you’re tacitly implying that laymen shouldn’t believe scientists, but that would be asinine, so please correct me if I have that wrong.

source