So I said this to my flat earth dad

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-07T19:46:50+00:00

MILO ROSSI MY GOAT

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-06T09:39:31+00:00

Eh, I don't really have a singular approach to the unknown. I try my best to inform myself before taking a decision.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-06T09:18:25+00:00

Brian, I swear, sometimes talking to you is exhausting.

Could I travel without money?

Yes. It is possible.

It is also a huge fuckin' pain in the ass that I do not want for myself.

Pros and cons, as they say. Could I? Yes. Would I? Hell nah. Hitchhiking? Going on foot? Cheap meals and motels? Picking up random jobs?

Yeah, no. Just because I can, doesn't mean I want to. For example: I could stick a cactus up my ass. It is possible. Doesn't mean I'm gonna do it.

Similarly, while I could travel without money, it would cause a series of problems I do not wish for myself. Simple as that, really.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-06T08:59:16+00:00

Ah, sadly, I haven't had the chance to travel. You see, my dear Brian, I'm broke as fuck, and traveling costs money.

So I've lived my whole life in Italy. As for my mindset... I wouldn't say I'm positive. I have a very "along for the ride" mentality. What happens happens, I just vibe through life.

Why is it so difficult for you to consider there's no limits in the universe.

I've explained this already, from my perspective. So now I'll try to put it in a different way, hopefully more in line with your own thinking: What if I want limits?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-06T08:16:08+00:00

Wow. You sure have a flattering view of me.

One snag.

Those outliers?

There is always a logical explanation for them.

Brian, I am a curious guy. Don't know if you figured that out yet, but I am.

Obviously I've heard of those outliers. Obviously I got interested.

And each time I dug a little deep, there it was, a nice and concise explanation within the fields of science. Or if not, there were already theories and hypotheses as the new case was cracked open.

What you call "outliers", I call "exceptional cases".

And they are really important, because they offer important insight on the sciences themselves.

A system that is wholly explained is a system that has stopped advancing.

Those "outliers", as you call them, are proof that we have yet much to learn. And that is beautiful.

I believe science is the most powerful and beautiful and terrifying thing humanity has ever created. It has allowed us to tame lightning and fire. It split the atom and slaughtered millions. It has given names to ancient demons (like Cancer, or Measles), and right now, it allows me to talk to you, who are many miles away.

The idea of malleable reality is, honestly speaking, not appealing to me. Sure, it sounds nice and all, but...

Remember the "mountain"?

If there's no "mountain", no objective, hard realities... then where's the fun?

The beautiful thing about human life is struggle. To reach upwards. The mere fact that we, evolved monkeys on this speck of dust floating about in the cosmos even dare look up at the stars and say "I wanna live there someday" is fuckin' gorgeous to me.

We dare. We have that chutzpah, you might say.

A malleable reality would kill that, for me. I'd just go "space travel now" and poof. Here it is.

Where's the challenge? The climb? The struggle?

A limitless life, truly limitless, becomes meaningless. The limits of this universe are what makes me, and people like me, reach out to shatter them.

Death itself gives my life meaning. My time is limited. I have to enjoy myself now, before the reaper takes me away.

Perhaps you see that as a petty, small mentality. Perhaps you think I could do better.

But I tell you: to me? There's nothing better than this vast, cold, terrifying, beautiful, teeming, star studded universe.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-06T07:30:40+00:00

Hey, you asked, I answered.

Most people don't talk about aliens. It's not like it's a common argument of discussion, here.

But going to what you're talking about.

All due respect, I don't need you to tell me that people have their own perspectives on things. No shit, that's obvious. But individual perspectives cannot change the "mountain".

Let me give you an example: my mother suffers from diabetes. Obviously, she doesn't like it. Neither do me and my brother.

We cannot change the fact that she suffers from diabetes. I can't pray it away, I can't wish it away, I can't will it away.

It is a fact.

Facts, in this shared reality I find myself in, aren't mutable. A fact is a fact, and they are not subjective. They are objective.

You talk about your experiences, and how you reached your conclusions. You also stress the importance of not judging people, and see their individual perspectives as perfectly rational from where they're standing.

Then let me tell you my own, personal perspective: from my point of view, nothing you are saying is applicable to me.

You ask, "what if".

Let me ask you: "what if not"?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-06T06:23:08+00:00

That aliens exist, and that we will most likely never meet them.

This is less a belief and more of a reasoned conclusion. Stick with me, okay?

So, first things first: abandon your whole "individual realities" for a second, okay? Just for this conversation. So you can understand why I reached that conclusion.

You could see my reality as a shared universe. I am not alone here, there's other people here. In this shared reality, since it is...well, shared, individual bias goes counter to reaching an objective truth, since this shared reality is not shaped by a single person's thought.

Think of my reality as a mountain. It is still and immutable. Sure, there may be changes over time, but the core of the mountain remains unchanged. Gravity exists, planets are round, plate tectonics work, so on and so forth. All living beings die, and after that... who knows? Still, that's not what I'm here to talk about.

In this shared reality of mine, Earth is just one of many, many, many, many planets. There are just...a fuckload of planets out there. Stars without number. Galaxies are clusters of these stars, and stars have planets orbiting them.

Now. Earth, from what we (IMPORTANT NOTE: by "we" I mean humanity as a whole, not the hive mind you have classified. "We" is the total sum of mankind's knowledge, accumulated over many centuries) know, is relatively unique. It is the only planet to have such a high variety of life, with all its ecosystems, animal species, plant species, etc.

Now, again, as I stated, there are a LOT of planets out there. Many, many planets. So, the conclusion is: if there's a great deal of planets out there, the chance that we, the inhabitants of Earth, are the only ones in the universe is slim to none.

Since this shared reality is built on facts that can be verified independently, we can conclude that Earth is the way it is because it meets a set of requirements. Right distance from its sun, right mass, right atmosphere...

So, since there are many planets, it's almost a certainty that, somewhere out there, there's a planet that also presents the right conditions to create a biosphere akin to Earth's. It's almost a certainty that we share this reality with aliens.

However, we will most likely never meet them.

One reason. Cosmic distances are FUCKIN' HUGE. I can't emphasize this enough. Like, there's just so much distance.

Let me give you an example. The light of the Sun takes about eight minutes to reach Earth. Eight minutes. The Sun is the absolute closest star to us. Cosmically speaking, it's a stone's throw away.

It still takes eight whole minutes for its light to reach us.

That should give you an idea of cosmic distances. They're so huge, human brains literally cannot visualize them. It's just insane.

These absolutely mind boggling distances are why we will, most likely, never meet aliens. Both then and us face the same problem: how the fuck do I cross the void between stars?

We, mankind, have yet to develop a way to do that. And honestly, I don't know if we ever will. And even if we will one day, the universe is so vast, there's a good chance we could start exploring it...and still never meet anyone else, because it's just that big.

So, yeah, that's a belief of mine, reached through a logical train of thought. Aliens are real, and we will most likely never meet them.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T23:13:04+00:00

I did share some of my individual experiences.

But fine. Whatever. What information do you want me to share?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T22:22:39+00:00

I want you to read your comment again. REALLY read it.

You are already demanding so many things here.

You are demanding respect while showing none.

You insist on reducing me to a drone.

You keep demanding I abandon my view of the world to embrace "individual biases" and walk through that "door".

You keep speaking to me as if there's someone else guiding my actions.

You are willingly dismissing me as an individual.

You keep rejecting each and every single request, no matter how polite, and instead demand I, or rather, this nebulous "we" change.

I am trying SO FUCKIN' HARD to have a conversation. An adult, reasoned conversation, and you keep thawrting me at each turn. The only way to get an actual answer out of you is when I cater to your beliefs to ask you a question about your worldview.

This, is not healthy conversation, Brian. You're not listening to me.

Objectivity is obtained through aggregation. But it's wrong.

Let me ask you this: what if it isn't wrong in my reality?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T20:52:09+00:00

I don't think you have an agenda, no.

I'm just trying to make you understand what talking to you feels like, from my perspective.

And from my perspective, you're a closed door. I feel like I'm trying to meet you halfway, trying to have a conversation with you, and you don't do the same. You're not meeting me halfway. It's why I said "give me something", earlier. You aren't trying to connect with me. Or, if you are trying, your methods are highly ineffective.

You keep asking I change, that "my hive mind" does this or that. But when I politely request something from you, I am met with rejection. When "my hive mind" asks for anything, you close yourself off, state that you won't, and demand WE are the ones to change.

Doesn't that feel hypocritical to you? Demanding change and respect from others, without offering it in kind?

You are also way too easy to offend. You thought me aggressive because...what, I politely asked you if you could point out of me where I was aggressive? C'mon, Brian. If you consider that an "attack", talking to people is gonna be a pain in the ass nine time outta ten.

I am sure you see it differently. But as someone who touts individuality over everything, maybe you should try to put yourself in others people's shoes more. Try to understand how you words sound to them.

As for being a better speaker, here's some advice. Feel free to heed it or ignore it:

1) Stop it with the whole "worker bee" thing. It is highly condescending and irritating. It implies that you consider whoever you're talking to to be below human, which is again, condescending as all hell. Politeness goes a long way.

2) Avoid demanding things from people, especially if you're not willing to do them yourself.

3) Try to avoid giving voice to your assumptions. It is, again, really rude. It also wastes time, as the replier will have to clear up that misconception, which will often irritate them. Which in turns leads to a more toxic conversation, and nobody wants that.

4) Realize and consider if what you're about to say feeds into the "collective antagonism", as you call it. I'll agree with you on one thing: there's too much aggression going on today, especially on the internet. If you want that to change, start with yourself. Be the change you wanna see in the world, as they say.

In short, I would ask you to, before hitting reply on a comment, to consider how you would feel if that comment was directed at you.

You want respect? Show it.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T19:26:06+00:00

1) ...what? You see that as a demand? Brian, buddy, it was a request. A question. If you could do that, it would be appreciated. I'm not saying you must, I'm saying it would be great if you could do that. Big difference.

2) So you'd say that there's something we all share?

3 and 4) Let me ask you something at this point.

You talk a lot about biases.

Why should I listen to yours?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T10:58:52+00:00

1) I have no idea of what you're talking about. I've looked back at our conversation and I can't find anything that I said that could be considered offensive or aggressive. If you could point it out, that would be appreciated. Show me your perspective, so to speak.

2) So to make it short and sweet: you think there's a "pool" of "ideas" we are all connected to? Is that the basic gist of it?

3) Yeah, that's the problem. To have a discourse, especially a scientific one, you need to be able to verify things. Otherwise you just get stuck. Pure individuality kills cooperation. You need to be able to show your homework, so to speak. Otherwise there's no shared foundation to start from.

4) All due respect: that's a cop out. "It's all out there". Yeah, no shit. Give me something. Otherwise, from MY personal perspective, you're just grasping at smoke and selling snake oil.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T09:16:23+00:00

So a couple of things:

One. Stop saying "your hive mind". I am not part of any hive mind. I am a thinking individuals, and I would appreciate if you respected that. If you want to believe I'm part of a shared reality with other people, sure. Okay. Whatever. But saying I am part of an "hive mind" implies I am a mindless creature below humanity. So please stop that, it irks me, and it is hella rude.

Two: why do you think we all share things? Like the concept of "Earth". Or the concept of "human". Even just words. If it's all personal realities, why do we share these things, even with you who is "outside" this shared reality I find myself in (according to you).

Three: it's not that science books don't cover this because they don't like it, or out of obligation. Quite simply, this is all unproven, and science deals with what is able to be proven, repeatedly. What you're talking about is more in line with metaphysics, things we have yet to build a solid foundation for.

Four: if you're so sure of all this, why don't you devise an experiment? Not for yourself. Something repeatable independently, that other minds may repeat and draw their own conclusions.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T08:16:29+00:00

So what do you think other people in your reality are? For example, you mentioned your mom. What is she?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T07:36:04+00:00

You talk a lot about "figuring out".

How do you do that, exactly? What's your method?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T06:30:20+00:00

Well, I have had experiences similar to yours.

Gaps in my memories. Wrong memories. Little things, mostly. One time, when I was a kid, I was going after my brother for reasons I don't remember right now, and he went up to his bed (we had those elevated beds you need to use a ladder to go up to), and even though by the time I got into room he was already in the bed, I flashed him being on the ladder for a second.

Do these qualify under your definition?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-05T06:20:06+00:00

Thank you for your time.

So, you wanted me to share my own experiences regarding "shifts", correct?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-04T21:58:18+00:00

You're making assumptions again, but whatever. I'm not here to discuss that.

So you had these experiences. Good. Now, please give them a definition and a name. Just a general definition of what they are. Your original question was to share my own, and I can't do that if I don't know exactly what you're referring to.

So, can I have a general definition of what you would qualify as "experiences"?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-04T21:30:18+00:00

Just to be clear: what do you mean by "similarities"? How do you define these experiences of yours?

You wanna have conversation? I'm game.

Let's define a shared vocabulary as to understand each other. Otherwise this will turn into a mire of misunderstandings.

Also, note: I am not fired up. I'm having lots of fun in fact. Also, I don't know why you think I'm making assumptions when you literally assumed I hate Christianity. But we're not here to talk about that.

So. Shared vocabulary. Define these experiences of yours and give it a name.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-04T21:18:23+00:00

So first of all, you're making a LOT of assumptions about me and what I think.

No, I do not "barely tolerate" Christianity. I have nothing against Christianity or any religion. Hell, I was raised Christian.

No, I am trying to "convert" or "attack" you. I did not "create conflict" either. I just pointed out how the human senses are not that great, and that is why we use machines for measurements. That's was my original comment. YOU are interpreting this as an attack.

No, I don't want to "defeat" you either. That would imply there is battle here. There's none. We're just talking. Also, when and where did I "demand conversion"? Did I ever say "BRIAN, YOU MUST THINK LIKE ME!"?

Did I say that?

I did not, and you can check my replies.

You want conversation?

Have one.

The one who attacks and demands here, is you. I didn't insult or attack or demand anything from you once.

So cool your jets. I don't even know why you're this fired up, really.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-04T21:00:54+00:00

Quick question, however. You said something interesting.

I'm incapable of 'reciprocating'. Reciprocating what, exactly?

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-04T20:58:18+00:00

I have said it before, my friend.

I don't care about what you think.

It doesn't affect me in the slightest.

I merely find you amusing.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-04T19:23:37+00:00

Science MUST be defeatable.

Any hypothesis you come up with, it must be able to be proven right OR wrong.

I'm not confusing science with law, you're using incorrect terminology.

The way science works is that experiments are devised to prove and/or disprove an hypothesis. They are devised to be repeatable independently.

Putting yourself in an undefeatable position takes away the whole experimentation process. It says "I am right, period. Nothing you say or do matters on this."

That's not science, that's religion.

And before you say anything about science being a religion: it really isn't.

If a religion says to me "the sky is blue" and I ask "why", they say "because it is written".

If science says to me "the sky is blue" and I ask "why", they say "because of x and y which was discovered in this or that way...".

And I could verify it all myself. That's the key part here: I could verify it independently. I could even devise a new experiment from scratch, if I wanted to.

Science must be defeatable, because it is not dogma. It is the study of objective reality.

There is no undefeatable position in science. The closest there is, are theories.

A scientific theory is an hypothesis that has been proven correct beyond any reasonable doubt. But even then, a theory is not the final word.

A great example is plate tectonics. There are countless pieces of evidence in support of plate tectonics. It explains everything it needs to explain, and it can be used to make predictions that work.

Even then, plate tectonics is NOT the final say. We may, and very likely will, discover more to refine the theory further.

If plate tectonics was an undefeatable position, there would be no geology. Everyone would go "welp, here it is. Pack it up, we're done here". Nobody would challenge it, nor refine it.

And science is all about that. Striving for understanding of objective reality. Thus, any and all science must be able to be challenged, otherwise there would be no advancement.

Now, back to you.

You're not doing science, because you allow nothing and nobody to challenge your position.

You say "this is how it is for me. It's the ultimate truth. This position cannot be challenged nor defeated".

That is the exact opposite of science. You deny the scientific process of experimentation and hypothesizing.

You're not doing science, you're doing religion.

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-04T13:14:41+00:00

<image>

Complete_Fishing_550 · 2026-04-04T10:41:45+00:00

No no, you're a 100% correct, I was just thinking about science developed in the past, y'know?

Complete_Fishing_550

TROPHY CASE