Post ASHEmpTPoeWxBUEu9Y by Moon@shitposter.club
(DIR) More posts by Moon@shitposter.club
(DIR) Post #ASGzdYAPIG6jaeSvyq by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T15:27:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The past is set in stone.
(DIR) Post #ASGzkJbroa2GT9XHSC by why@shitposter.club
2023-02-02T15:28:50.254239Z
3 likes, 1 repeats
@Hyolobrika the past is malleable and controlled by con men
(DIR) Post #ASGzoVytlAwhzsJLRw by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T15:29:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@why The reflection of the past that exists in people's minds, not the real past.
(DIR) Post #ASGzvdcrjfwzjXOzTM by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T15:30:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@why I don't know if that's true for the reflection of the past anyway. I've never met any such conmen.
(DIR) Post #ASH0T5yXLzcVDLUaC8 by why@shitposter.club
2023-02-02T15:36:56.151824Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@Hyolobrika moments in time besides the present are an abstract nonreal concept. images (artifacts, traditions) of the past exist, but they must be a part of the present in order to exist. an inherent manipulation or intervention by the present must take place to "preserve" the "real past". Stonehenge only stands today because some dope hasn't knocked it down yet
(DIR) Post #ASH12rO34SKUOTTlFw by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T15:43:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@why then what makes them con men?
(DIR) Post #ASH26X6SWjlqb6ZDAu by why@shitposter.club
2023-02-02T15:55:14.645230Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Hyolobrika randomly knocking over stonehenge, or doing an oopsie on the library of alexandria, isn't a control of historical records. If it were to be deliberately controlled, it would require someone who has gained the people's trust and exploits it to tell a non-truth, and add that to the historical record. Since we only know what has been recorded, who else can we trust?Whether or not it is happening is up for discussion, but I don't think anyone would change their opinions on the matter.
(DIR) Post #ASH2Gycl3l2iqdedqS by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T15:57:09Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@why if the truth is just what people believe, then making people believe things makes them true, which would mean that the con men are telling the truth, eventually
(DIR) Post #ASH2KOZv1EjqDDxMqu by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T15:57:46Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@why tl;dr: postmodernism is incoherent
(DIR) Post #ASH3RtFhTLtjKKdZ4q by why@shitposter.club
2023-02-02T16:10:19.973582Z
2 likes, 1 repeats
@Hyolobrika consensus != truth. even people who know better concede to the popular lie, just to not go insane. thankfully lots of skeptics will write about holocaust, 9/11, etc but there will never be a solved historial record, it's purely a social war of opinions
(DIR) Post #ASH3VrddPnDDTnj9XM by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T16:11:02Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@why you are contradicting yourself
(DIR) Post #ASH3ZPhTEL05zPDK3k by why@shitposter.club
2023-02-02T16:11:42.443101Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@Hyolobrika i never make sense
(DIR) Post #ASH4lnAzs7OWEFUVkW by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T16:25:08Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@why archeology is a thing, and you can date documents, so it's clearly not purely a social war of opinions. if it is then so is every other intellectual endeavour
(DIR) Post #ASH79fxCZnQ2geYSiu by taylan@pl.tkammer.de
2023-02-02T16:50:56.911695Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@why @Hyolobrika @hj > when you're a brain dead Holocaust denier and have to justify your retardation with ten layers of vague and abstract post-modernist arguments about how the past is a social construct that only exists in our minds
(DIR) Post #ASH7DVJO5MzEq5l1hw by why@shitposter.club
2023-02-02T16:52:33.849837Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@taylan @Hyolobrika @hj everyone already has rebuttals for the common arguments you have to start making shit up
(DIR) Post #ASH7HYNIdgFvUuWC9Y by marine@breastmilk.club
2023-02-02T16:53:18.148403Z
2 likes, 0 repeats
@why @Hyolobrika @taylan @hj why would i bother making shit up when talking about a made up event?
(DIR) Post #ASH7NUcbVR9nawVc6C by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T16:54:21Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@why @taylan @hj which makes one wonder why some countries bother banning it
(DIR) Post #ASHEOAbM7pNRTLC9ke by Moon@shitposter.club
2023-02-02T18:12:53.010286Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@why @Hyolobrika funny you mention, here's a picture of stonehenge in 1877. in 1901, 1920, 1959, and 1964 the stones have been adjusted by somebody's idea of how they "should" be arranged. Maybe it was accurate, maybe not. we don't have a good track record for these types of things. They probably have been moved around before that, there are a ton of paintings and drawings through history that don't agree on how they looked. I found a couple paintings from the 1500s, there was a super simple one that looks a lot like how it looks now, but then there's a super detailed rendering where a bunch of it is knocked down.
(DIR) Post #ASHEbMrFrq8VFWvP6G by lain@lain.com
2023-02-02T18:14:29.938103Z
4 likes, 1 repeats
@why @Hyolobrika
(DIR) Post #ASHEmpTPoeWxBUEu9Y by Moon@shitposter.club
2023-02-02T18:17:06.286426Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@why @Hyolobrika tbh I'm going through a pain thing right now that made it hard for me to follow you guys' arguments so I'm not taking anybody's side, just saying that we kind of have this idea of stonehenge being eternal but it's been changed many times and for large amounts of time the look of it was different from now. some people aren't sure it was ever even finished by the people who made it so it's possible that the version we have today is completely ahistorical
(DIR) Post #ASHEsuH2sfdtoILqiG by nikiboo@strelizia.net
2023-02-02T18:18:25.279875Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lain @Hyolobrika @why KANE LIVES
(DIR) Post #ASHJmC5WkVR8ntaAPQ by RADC@mastodon.world
2023-02-02T18:25:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lain @Hyolobrika @why Who’s Kane because that’s stolen from the movie 1984 published around 1949
(DIR) Post #ASHK85bLY0C93XuEu8 by lebronjames75@shitposter.club
2023-02-02T19:11:31.321734Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Hyolobrika @why semantics of past and future and present are funfor this post, ignore "the world is matrix" philosophies and faulty memory of humans etcthe past and the future are concepts based on assumptions. the past is based on clues, backwards prediction. if i know right now that a computer counts up X by +1 each second, and the X is at 350, then i know it must have started counting 350 seconds ago). the future is based on forwards prediction. in 60 seconds from now, the value of X must be 410. If a conman tells me that the computer started counting from 300, not 0, my estimation of the past suddenly changes. this is why its malleable. and why Why is 100% correctnow, unlike the past and the future, the present is based on observation. And this is the only thing we can observe as is. It's based on sensory input in the present. And we take this information input, and make either predictions of what the past was, or what the future will be.continuing the computer X value incrementing example, I will reveal a third clue: You were logged in and observing the computer increment its value every second. And you tell me: "The conman lies, the computer has started counting from 0, with no issues."Based on all information I have, I have two beliefs of what happened.A: "The computer started counting 350 seconds ago"B: "The computer started counting 50 seconds ago"And now it's not an issue of what the real past is, it's an issue of trust. It is objectively correct, that either of these is the true, set in stone, this actually did happen, REAL past. Hyolobrika is also 100% correct. There was an objective, real past. And it's objectively true, that since I didn't have first hand observations of the counting happening from 0 to 350, I have to believe either one of my sources if one is more trustworthy. if both are equal in trustworthiness, be it negative or positive, then i obviously cant believe either and must commit to acting like both were true.Both of you are correct. you should kiss and make out
(DIR) Post #ASHK866Xg19GcIV9Wq by Hyolobrika@berserker.town
2023-02-02T19:17:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lebronjames75 @why if you take why as meaning "we can't be sure about the past", then sure. but in my estimation, he actually meant something more like "there is no objective truth about the past"