Discover the unexpected virtue of patience and the transformative power of civil discourse with myself and my co-host Joe Haslam, as we navigate the tumultuous waters of flat earth theories and their broader implications. This episode is more than a mere scientific critique; it's an exploration of how we react and interact with ideas that stand in stark contrast to our own. We bring historical cases to the fore, like Alfred Wegener's continental drift, to instill a sense of humility and openness that may seem counterintuitive but is essential for growth and understanding in any debate.
Embark on a journey where we confront the darker side of discourse—hate and intolerance—through the lens of flat earth skepticism and beyond. We strip away the animosity often found in such contentions to reveal a core lesson: the value of admitting when we don't hold all the answers. Along with Joe, we dive into the role pride plays in stifling constructive conversation, whether it's in scientific circles or the political sphere, and how embracing humility can be a beacon of strength. Our dialogue weaves through the intricacies of social interaction and the human penchant for confirmation, reminding us that fostering respectful engagement is a potent tool for personal and communal advancement.
As we wrap up this episode, we reflect on the personal narratives that have shaped our perspectives on engaging with contrasting beliefs. From friendships strengthened by respectful disagreement to the societal shifts seen in political allegiances, we unpack the power of civil discourse in shaping our world. And to continue this riveting conversation beyond the podcast, we invite you to subscribe and become part of our community. Your valuable insights and diverse perspectives are what make this journey so enriching, and we thank you, our listeners, for your unwavering support and engagement.
Discover the unexpected virtue of patience and the transformative power of civil discourse with myself and my co-host Joe Haslam, as we navigate the tumultuous waters of flat earth theories and their broader implications. This episode is more than a mere scientific critique; it's an exploration of how we react and interact with ideas that stand in stark contrast to our own. We bring historical cases to the fore, like Alfred Wegener's continental drift, to instill a sense of humility and openness that may seem counterintuitive but is essential for growth and understanding in any debate.
Embark on a journey where we confront the darker side of discourse—hate and intolerance—through the lens of flat earth skepticism and beyond. We strip away the animosity often found in such contentions to reveal a core lesson: the value of admitting when we don't hold all the answers. Along with Joe, we dive into the role pride plays in stifling constructive conversation, whether it's in scientific circles or the political sphere, and how embracing humility can be a beacon of strength. Our dialogue weaves through the intricacies of social interaction and the human penchant for confirmation, reminding us that fostering respectful engagement is a potent tool for personal and communal advancement.
As we wrap up this episode, we reflect on the personal narratives that have shaped our perspectives on engaging with contrasting beliefs. From friendships strengthened by respectful disagreement to the societal shifts seen in political allegiances, we unpack the power of civil discourse in shaping our world. And to continue this riveting conversation beyond the podcast, we invite you to subscribe and become part of our community. Your valuable insights and diverse perspectives are what make this journey so enriching, and we thank you, our listeners, for your unwavering support and engagement.
Today on the Idiot's Guide, prepare to enter the bewildering realm of flat earthers, where reason goes to die and ignorance reigns supreme. And it's a sad day when your dog runs away. That rhymes, I like that. But it's a good day when your dog turns up. But no one really expects their dog to show up 2,000 miles away from home.
Speaker 1:I'm your host, adam Richardson, aka the Profit Hacker, and I'm joined by the man in charge, mr Joe Haslam. Welcome to the Idiot's Guide. Hey, if you're enjoying the content, don't forget to subscribe and join our awesome community. It's quick and easy and you'll never miss out on the latest videos. Hit that subscribe button now and let's grow together now, and let's grow together the.
Speaker 1:I think. I think the thing that I would want to start out with um is I just I think that they're really dumb, really really dumb, and and not not not like in a way that, like I mean I think I phrased it really, really eloquently insulting like reigns supreme. You know, ignorance reigns supreme, ignorance is not even fair. Like I wouldn't even put them in the bracket of intelligence, like you know, like it is they, they lack the intellect to to even answer one valid question, and so so it's it, and so I think in the frustration is if I'm going to go after flat earthers and the just stupidity that we're dealing with at the level that they're at, I have to be dumber just to feel like it's worth the oxygen I'm using.
Speaker 2:See, all of that is just awful. Everything that you just said, it's true. No, what you just said. Now, flat earthers may be wrong and there's plenty of evidence that suggests that or that proves I'm not even going to use suggest, but proves that flat earthers are wrong, let alone direct observation.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:However, the vitriol, the aggression with which people attack flat earthers or really anyone that has any kind of theory, is so damaging to conversation and to people because when you attack someone with such rude language, all it does is it invites that rude language back I.
Speaker 1:I think it's important maybe to to say, in an effort of better conversation, you might want to entertain them, but when they open their mouth and they, the first thing they say has no value, no validity to it whatsoever You're like, look part of. I think my responsibility is to help people save themselves from themselves if they're that dumb.
Speaker 2:So okay, the problem there is you are calling them dumb.
Speaker 1:Okay.
Speaker 2:Okay, you are saying that that's, that's nice I. There's a lot of other words I could say, but unfortunately the idea here is is true debate, true conversation, true scientific reasoning is not vitriol, it is reasoned understanding. And so they may be completely wrong. And I'm not just talking about flat earthers, I'm talking about anyone that comes in with a different theory within the scientific community or within any community, but to come in with a view of hate and just vitriolic comments, I'm going to say vitriol a lot right it sounds like a big it's, it's, it's about like an eight dollar word.
Speaker 1:There you go um but it's not a. It's not something you do with a violin, though, so just saying it's not a music word's not something you do with a violin, though.
Speaker 2:So just saying it's not a music word term, it's it means bad, you know, like talking down on somebody. Yeah, A level of viciousness. Um, when, when you, when you come at it that way, it devolves the entire community. It brings everyone down.
Speaker 1:I mean the Mexican community of flat earthers. They don't need any help, they're already.
Speaker 2:Okay, I'm going to share with you. Okay, so, not everyone knows who this guy is, but his name is Alfred Wegener. Okay, so he was the guy who discovered continental drift. So continental drift, for those of you who don't know, is the movement of the tectonic plates around the Earth. Okay, so he theorized that there was, at one point, a one landmass on Earth.
Speaker 1:Okay.
Speaker 2:And so we now know that that is true. All the evidence points to that being. Yes, that is the case. Continental drift, it's called Pangea and he theorized this back in 1912. And back then he had so many haters. Now one of the problems was he was wrong in some of his math. He was off by uh 100 degrees, or by uh 100 times on one of his calculations okay so the drift.
Speaker 2:He had it calculated at it8, and it was supposed to be 2.18 movement per. I think it was per year. It's been a long time.
Speaker 1:So he didn't put a decimal point. Yeah, he put his decimal point wrong.
Speaker 2:Now that wasn't the only reason people were sending so much hate his way. They were making fun of him on how could you possibly think that all these continents fit together? And there was one geologist. So his name was Max Semper, and this is in 1917. And this was in the Central Journal for Mineralogy, Geology and Paleontology. And so this would be, you know, back in 1917, the peer reviewed journals of its day. Okay, and so now this is translated from the original German, so hopefully it's a good translation. I verified it against a couple of different.
Speaker 2:This is what Max Semper said about Alfred Wegener. So one can only ask for the necessary distance to be maintained and close the request With that. In the future, he not honor geology any further, but to seek out disciplines that have so far forgotten to write about their goal. Oh, holy St Florian, spare this house. Set fire to others. Set fire to others, However, because of the repeated excuses that the theory still needs modification and is not yet finished, compare one of Gott's sayings with those of dilettantes who can never finish because they don't know how to start properly. He essentially told him get out of geology because you're an idiot, and compared him to dilettantes who pretend to have knowledge. Okay, this and that was written in the journals of its day. And yet Alfred Wegner was right. He was completely right.
Speaker 1:Hegner was right. He was completely right. So do you think that eventually, one day we're going to run into a culture that you know takes 2000s? I mean, like this goes all the way back to Greek Greek times, greek theologians that, like, what is it Pythagoras was, was one of them, that that's where, like you see, some of the origins of flat earthers actually come from. And then they take a good, healthy break, probably took the advice of of your guy there, and and then now they're back with, with you know, force, but trying to just prove something that's already it's a ridiculous argument and that may be, but the idea of being a hater is not benefiting science.
Speaker 2:support for his theories. He would have probably made a lot more movement, no pun intended, on his continental drift uh theories okay it would have been a lot further along.
Speaker 2:We would have been a lot further along in science. There are a lot of cases where, now again, flat earthers are wrong. Okay, but they do not deserve the hate, because hate does not belong in the scientific community. Criticism yes, criticism always belongs in the scientific community. It's important in order to test someone's theory, in order to revise that theory, make sure it works. That's why you go to peer-reviewed journals, that's why you have to repeat the results, that's why you have to do all this stuff. But the vehement hate and the YouTube videos, the TikToks on teaching people how to hate flat earthers, is just so detrimental to not just science but our community as a whole, because every generation, every year, we seem to be getting more and more full of hate and willing to be mean to other people. We learned as toddlers don't be mean and yet, as we become adults, we are becoming more and more mean.
Speaker 1:I can honestly say this is not an argument that is unique to flat earthers. I think it's something that flat earthers are a great example of sheer ignorance and a level of. This happened. It's like arguing with a toddler.
Speaker 2:This happened with Einstein too. So Einstein, his theories of general relativity and special relativity were not universally accepted, and special relatively were not universally accepted. There were scientists that disagreed with him because he was challenging 200 years of Newtonian physics and they didn't like that, and so they rebelled against it. And there were a lot of lay people who fought against Einstein's theories and thought they could prove him wrong. And that's really what we're seeing in the flat earth community is it's a lot of lay people who don't understand a lot of it. They think they do. They understand a little bit of it, but they're making the effort. They're wrong, but they're making the effort.
Speaker 1:So I guess I want to understand your position because, for me, if, if I'm talking to somebody and they don't seem teachable, it's a waste of time, okay, so, whatever your subject is that you're talking about, if you are talking about something that is well and abundantly proven false, it's incorrect, it's a conspiracy theory. At this point, like you know, they ought to just be tossed off of that edge of that world that they believe in because it's, it's, it's, it's, it's. One of those things where you're like there are other things much more valuable to have a conversation about than than flat earthers.
Speaker 2:Well, and if that's the case, have a better conversation. But what you just said is they should be thrown off the edge of their flat earth. You, right there, just advocated and people do this a lot, they advocate killing opponents, someone who just differs on their viewpoint. Look at it politically. No matter where you are on the political spectrum, you see the opposite end of that as your enemy. Yeah, what the why? Are you thinking of another American, another citizen, another human being who simply has a different point of view than you as an enemy?
Speaker 2:There are literal wars going on around this world right now and we're considering fellow citizens of our same state, our same cities as enemies. That's the hate that I'm talking about. We shouldn't see differing point of views as the enemy, but rather as opportunities to grow our own points of view. I love debate we do a lot of that on this podcast as well as off this podcast and it is a great opportunity to solidify one's own viewpoint, because you have to be challenged in your views, and that's why I welcome flat earthers to share their viewpoints. I welcome lay people to share their viewpoints.
Speaker 1:I think the thing that maybe might be part of the agitation is this lack of almost fairness in the discussion. So if, if I'm having a discussion and I bring up a valid point or a valid question about, you know, a perspective that you may have that's different than mine and I I asked that question. I have evidence backing my point why I would challenge that Okay. But then the answer is just deflected, it's not even answered, it's moved around, maybe even gaslit, and then all of a sudden everyone's ticked off at everyone because we haven't gotten anywhere. Zero progress. It's just a massive failure of any sort of healthy what do you call it? Discourse.
Speaker 2:Well, it all comes down to arrogance and an inability or pride. I guess. Not necessarily arrogance A matter of pride, Okay.
Speaker 1:Okay.
Speaker 2:So, going back to the political arena here, politicians do that all the time and we accept it. Now, the reason they do that is because I don't know if we necessarily accept it.
Speaker 1:We just we accept it. We're not given an option to not to.
Speaker 2:Well, we always have options. We always have options in the political arena, but we accept that. As that's just a politician years or so, yeah, well, again, we can vote for someone else. That's why there are write-in options. Um, but we, in those situations, we accept that. And the reason politicians do it is because they don't want to be seen as not knowing something. They don't want to be seen as not knowing something, they don't want to be seen as weak, and that is that pride that comes in because they want that position. Okay, when it comes to a scientific standpoint, even beyond that, how easy is it for you to say, when someone questions you on something I don't know and feel confident that you're going to walk away? Okay with that.
Speaker 1:You know, I would say in years past. That's a hard thing to say. You know and I think that you're right in the sense of like maybe a political position you want to. You know honestly, those are perfect opportunities to see somebody give a whole pile of word salad. You know that doesn. Those are perfect opportunities to see somebody give a whole pile of word salad. You know that doesn't get you anywhere, no progress in their statement. But it's because they they can't just say you know honestly, I don't know.
Speaker 2:Right, because they would be seen as a terrible person if they don't know something.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:We as a society have promoted this idea that if you don't know something, there is something wrong with you. When ignorance is a part of everyday life, I mean we have no idea what someone else is actually thinking. We are ignorant about everyone that we talk to, but we have such a hard time saying I don't know. And so when you're talking to someone who's a flat earther, they honestly would have a hard time saying when you question them on something, I don't know, because then you are, they fear that you would then rail on them and because they don't know something that disproves their entire theory. Same thing happens to scientists in mainstream science.
Speaker 1:When I think about, like you know, the, the, the great, you know sail, like voyagers, that, that that you know sailed the seas and mapped the world and you know from, from all over the place, and how they traveled, and then you know, I think, okay, well, if you want to prove a point like the earth is flat, like every effort that you've seen, that I've, that I've seen and that I've looked at, it has always proven that the earth is round, like, I think one of the most recent is like a an error rate of 15 degrees, which is like, basically, when you take a laser pointer to the horizon, there's an error rate of 15 degrees every hour, which means it's rotating, it's moving away from your laser position. So that's the reason why you can't do it.
Speaker 1:so anyway right that's one, that's one. So every time that's like they try to prove this, it's proven the opposite of what they're trying to accomplish. So it's going hey look, you know the Voyagers did it this way. Why don't you guys go seek out and I'm not saying jump off the edge, find it. You know what that's a safe journey. You'll be out for a while. You know what that's a safe journey. You'll be out for a while.
Speaker 2:You know possibly won't be around anymore because you'll be out there for the rest of your existence trying to find the edge of the world so there are a lot of times we've talked about mental health on this podcast uh, a few times and one of the hard things that just about any person has to do is confront the unknown. You know, because if you go out there and you have an idea, um so I actually dealt with this in therapy a couple of weeks ago where, um, being autistic, it's very hard for me to understand facial cues. I don't understand the normal social behaviors, and so understanding whether someone actually likes me or not is extremely difficult.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:And so the therapist questioned me. Go out there and ask are you my friend or are you not my friend? Are you just pretending to be my friend? This is just a little insight into what it's like.
Speaker 1:I mean that in and of itself is a terrifying subject. Not just because of how awkward that feels, but how awkward that would come across at the same time.
Speaker 2:Right, exactly.
Speaker 1:You know, like are you my friend. You know like there's ways to get there, you know.
Speaker 2:A lot of times where we're confronted with those kinds of situations where we suspect the world is a certain way, either positive or negative, and we are terrified. Certain way, either positive or negative, and we are terrified terrified to confront that for fear that the opposite is going to be true, yeah, that that is common among all humans. Okay.
Speaker 1:And so it triggers our most basic survival tech techniques.
Speaker 2:Exactly so what you're telling the flat earthers to do is they've got a theory, but if they go out and they test it to the extreme of their abilities, now remember these are lay people that are doing this. They are trying to enter into the world of science and question. This is not new. Like I said, this happened during Einstein's time. This is not new. Like I said, this happened during einstein's time. Okay, and so if they go out there, their most basic fear is that it's going to be proved wrong, and so you are asking them to do something that you are generally unwilling to do yourself, and so we have to ask ourselves why do we present so much hate toward other people and expect them to do more than we would do ourselves? And part of that is just because we're we. We want to feel those emotions.
Speaker 1:You know, I think that the criticism against a flat earther is definitely a one where most people would just shake their head.
Speaker 1:Yeah, criticism is valid, completely valid, but you know, and even trying to negotiate some sort of conversation with them doesn't seem fruitful. However, there's lots of these kinds of scenarios where both sides have valid points that back up their position and, because of that, the opportunity for you to say you know what, I don't know. If you're confronted by some criticism and you need to go back and say, honestly, I don't know off the top of my head, let me get back to you on that and be able, honestly, I don't know off the top of my head, let me get back to you on that and be able to. You know, I've had that. I've had people come up and challenge me, you know, in church circles and challenge me about the way that I practice. That's the easiest way to say that.
Speaker 1:But not just like in. You know, like it's, it's within the same. You know theological circles, so it's still God, it's still all of that, still Bible-based. But then having somebody from another church community confront me about something that in their community they are so you know, so against it, and then, you know, just criticize me literally and just leave me there, mouth open, just going I thought you guys were friends Like I can't believe you guys would do this and like we do it because we love you, I was like that is not love at all.
Speaker 2:Yeah, criticism is okay. When you question something, that's perfectly fine. You know, in in some theologies, questioning is expected. In science, questioning is expected, right it is. Those kinds of things are good and in one way, that's exactly what flat earthers are doing. They are questioning the existing science. Now they have been many times proved wrong.
Speaker 2:Well, their questions have been answered and they're like well, I don't know, you're like you can't just la la la, if you ask the question it doesn't work that way they come up with new questions to ask to try to work around the it's like a five year old.
Speaker 2:And, and it's okay to question, it's okay to question flat earthers, but what I'm talking about is just the vitriol with which people do it the viciousness, the anger, the hate. It's what you were talking about. When people come at you in religious circles, they're not coming at you, you know, questioning why you do it this way. We've talked about that. We have very different religious backgrounds.
Speaker 2:Um, what was it?
Speaker 2:The apostles creed that you, around Christmas, uh time in our podcast you were uh talking about.
Speaker 2:I'd never heard that, um, and so afterwards I was asking you you know, what is this? What is what is all that about? That's good, right, that kind of questioning we, you know what is this, what is all that about? That's good, right, that kind of questioning we, you know, we talk a lot about science versus religion and you know we criticize each other's viewpoints through questions, but never, ever is it done through a method of anger or hate or viciousness, and that's the difference. And so, talking to flat earthers, science versus religion is another one of these, where you've got creationists versus evolutionists and there's a lot of hate on both sides that go toward each other, on both sides that go toward each other, and there are a lot of people who talk about the flat earthers are just rude and mean people. Well, part of that's because they're being treated rudely and meanly, but I do want to share one scientist who, despite being described as an utter a-hole and he described other people the same way he made some major, major advancements in science.
Speaker 1:His name was Fritz Zwicky, and so he once Sounds like the guy from the Transformers, the Wickwicky or whatever, yeah.
Speaker 2:But he once said and this is taken from. This is an excerpt from Cosmic Horizons Astronomy at the Cutting Edge, a publication of the New Press citing my sources so he once said astronomers are spherical bastards. No matter how you look at them, they are just bastards. This is a scientist talking about his colleagues. This is the kind of person that he was. He was just rude and mean. Okay, and most people don't even know who he is because he never was popular in the scientific world because of how rude and mean he was the exact opposite of albert einstein. Albert einstein was genial, he was nice, he was of the people, and so everyone knows who albert einstein is. But fritz wiki, he was the one who discovered and wrote a lot of the mathematical proofs for dark matter. He's the one who actually named supernovas as supernovas.
Speaker 1:He was the one who discovered neutron stars, and so he made some massively important discoveries during his lifetime, despite being an utter jerk, and so we cannot judge someone's scientific value based on their personality if it's coming down to, regardless of the disagreement, or it's the the differing perspective, if you come at it with an ego soup that is superior you feel superior to the other it's demeaning, it's demoralizing it's it's not respectful of their perspective, even if they're an imbecile. You know like, honestly, there's moments where I'll just probably cut the line and just say I'm not interested in even wasting the oxygen on it. However, I won't. You know like that's the worst. I would insult Before I would hurl an insultanted. At the very beginning of this episode, I hurled some insults. I intentionally played the role. However, like there's lots of that out there, there's tons, there's tons that that are that do the present the argument and validate how absolutely wrong it is that flat earthers are. Just their theory has a massive pile of holes and that's okay. It's okay to say that it's.
Speaker 2:It's not okay to say this is why you're a dumb Right, I mean, and JWST.
Speaker 1:So the James Webb space telescope is showing us a lot.
Speaker 2:Like jesus was super tight, tight um, I like the jwst is making us rethink a lot about the universe right now, and so we're learning a lot about the math, mathematics and the equations that we had that we thought were perfect and always constant throughout the universe. That aren't, yeah, and a lot of things are now being questioned, and that's exactly how it should be. That's, and no one's taking offense Well, maybe someone is but I mean, there's, there's clear evidence out there. But the idea is, if you present it calmly and talk about it calmly, that is appropriate conversation. That is proper debate. We don't have to agree, you know. We don't have to look at it the same way.
Speaker 1:I would even go as far as to say, not just calm, but what is in the calm? It's humility. You said it earlier the biggest breaking point in a discussion is when someone injects their pride into it. And they can't be wrong. They have to answer everything, regardless of the correctness of that answer. And, and you know, if you're completely unqualified to answer something, then say it, be honest. But we lack the humility to admit that. We lack the humility to approach the other person that you may flat out disagree with. We lack that humility to go, hey, you know, like I could, could be wrong Probably not, but but you know there's a lot of evidence that says that I'm right. I'm not going to use that as a weapon, pile you and bury you with it and say you're done, you know present the information, but don't be hateful about it.
Speaker 2:There's, there's, there's a lot of hate out there. We don't need that in our conversations with each other. We don't need that in our scientific or our debates uh, any of these conversations that we have. We don't need that. And it's not just science, it's not just flat earthers. Flat earthers, that's the big one right now. They're they're taking a lot of flack for their viewpoints. Um, but you have which they are wrong.
Speaker 1:But political perspectives, exactly. You know international conflict perspectives. You know you have humanitarian perspectives. You know if you're talking. You know economic perspectives. Like all of it is, at some points some of it's like a raging loud billboard. Hey, look over here. And still people are like nah, la, la, la la. And you're like, oh my gosh, and it's infuriating and you want to go to hurl insults, but the only thing you're going to do is cause that divide to become even greater.
Speaker 2:You know we always laugh. You know we make jokes about monkeys in zoos throwing poop at each other and, honestly, that's all we, as humans, evolved.
Speaker 1:More evolved primates.
Speaker 2:That's all we're doing is we're just throwing poop at each other in the form of hate. Truly evolved humans don't need to do that, and we need to stop doing that If we want to prove that we are an evolved species. That's where it comes from. Stop hating on everyone.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:It just comes down to that. Just, you don't have to agree. You don't have to agree politically, you don't have to agree scientifically, religiously, you don't have to agree geopolitically. You don't have to agree socioeconomically. Yeah, you don't have to agree North versus South, you don't have to agree East versus West. You don't even have to agree on the same college to support. But that does not invite hate.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:That invites compromise and recognitions of one's rights to be able to have an opinion of their own, to have a viewpoint of their own.
Speaker 1:Do you think that the word is compromise or just Tolerate Tolerance? Yeah, I don't think it's a compromise, because you aren't truly changing your own value in the situation. You know, going into whatever their position is. You're not compromising, but you're tolerating the fact that their viewpoint might be different than yours.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and my version of compromise is agree to disagree.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:You've come to a compromise, you have agreed on something. You have agreed to disagree, yeah, but do it nicely. But my best friend, my best friend in the world, the exact opposite of me, exact opposite. We will sit until three o'clock in the morning. We'll we'll spend hours, days debating different topics and we enjoy it because it helps us to build our own viewpoints. We're never hateful toward each other even though we are exact opposites, and it's great. I love. Having a best friend like that, and that's what we all need to be is just a lot more friendly. We don't have to agree, we don't have to see eye to eye in order to function well as a society. It helps us when we don't agree, if we accept it, if we accept disagreement.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think you know you and I have lots of conversations that are we don't see eye to eye on. But we, it doesn't mean that we have conflict in it, it just means that we we have differing points of view. I think it's unique in most scenarios I've had. I've had people in my home that I've asked to leave because they aren't willing to have a conversation.
Speaker 1:It's very one-sided say your position, do this, and nothing is allowed to have any other perspective. And it was my house. I said get out. Sorry, if you can't respect the fact that I might look at this different than you, then we don't need to carry on anymore. See ya, different than you, then we don't need to carry on anymore. See ya, you know, I've had people who I've I've been a mentor, a teacher for a coach that I've literally had to have those conversations. They aren't willing to to do that. They're too stuck on that pride, they're too stuck on their ways and they're willing to hurl insults at the other person because their perspective is, you know, in self superior than others.
Speaker 2:Now I do want to. I do want to end my point with a quote here. So this comes from an article on Big Think Albert, who even Einstein had major critics, but this was something that was said to him, to Einstein, from Max Planck. So Max Planck is a renowned, uh physicist, won the 1918 Nobel Nobel prize in physics. Um, and so he said, or he wrote, a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because the opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it and that goes to anything. That's not just a scientific truth, but you've got to realize it really doesn't matter in the long run.
Speaker 1:Well in the long run. If it's true, it has longevity. It will outlast you in your existence, so that I think, is like the flat earther, as our main subject here is the fact that if it has validity to, it will carry through to the next person. Now, lots of people, dumb people are making babies that are probably going to continue being dumb, so it's.
Speaker 2:I don't know if it's scientifically proven as a scientific theory, it will not move forward.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:That is the reality is that they may believe it today, but the next generation won't. Yeah, so why throw hate? Why hurl such negativity when, in the long run, it won't last? That's just the way it is. So there's no reason to, there is no reason to be that mean that goes for anything that goes for. I mean the political parties. The republicans of today used to be the democrats of 100 years ago. You know it's. It's no, it won't last if it's not valid. And so we see that. I mean, how many scientific theories do we now have that have been proven wrong over time and they're no longer part of our lexicon? It's gone. We don't need to worry about it.
Speaker 1:There's no need to be hateful yeah, well, you know, I think one of the one of the things that's that's interesting is uh trying to, uh trying to basically push you know someone to just come to terms with something Like if you lost your dog and you put a thousand flyers out trying to find your dog, your dog, just one day you took him to the shop, like work every single day all the time. Done it a bunch of times and dog wanders off and it's gone. So, and you've, you're, you're trying, and your friends are like you just have to accept the reality here. You're like, well, you know, like I, I haven't found my dog, so it's my dog's gotta be out there, I just believe it is. And so, handing out flyers, and you're like, just accept reality, come on, you're so dumb, why would you try this? Like no, no, that's not how it is. But you keep persisting and persisting and eventually you're like you know what it's been a while.
Speaker 1:I like I don't, I don't think I'm going to find my dog, I think my dog is gone, I think I think so. But then, but then, joe, you get a call from from Michigan. You live in San Diego and there's a rescue there that has found your dog, happy, healthy, but escaped from wherever it was. So the theory is that the dog was probably picked up from someone that said, oh you're a cute dog, and instead of going I should return this to the owner that it's chipped with. It just moved across the country with the dog and so maybe stolen. I don't know, it's not like it's a it's. It's not like it's an expensive, you know, you know racing dog, I don't know what it like you know some, some sort of champion breed.
Speaker 1:No, it's just, it looks like a mutt, little shaggy dog, blonde, blondish hair, and you know, uh, mirad human, he's a human, uh, and his family they live in San Diego Went to the shop one day with the dog. Dog took off, couldn't find him. That was last summer and earlier this month in Michigan, 2000 miles away from where they were, this dog turns up in a shelter, basically Not like an animal shelter, it's like a rescue. And it's interesting because that, I imagine the first thing that comes to mind is like man, how did it survive? How did it cross the Rockies? You know, like what a great movie.
Speaker 1:You're like probably not Hummerbound, yeah, I movie. You're like probably not bound. It was probably, yeah, I know it's like again, number nine, hummer bound nine. Where's shadow? You know, um, but you have like, you have this idea that, uh, that that you'd think this, this journey, is just some incredible thing. That, uh, that the dog went on. But when they got the dog, it wasn't like malnourished, it wasn't like dirty or anything like that, it was well-kept. They just picked it up and when they ran the chip it was not from Michigan. Wow. So they are reunited and they, you know, like imagine just getting that phone call six months later going. Are you? This is what? What? Yeah?
Speaker 2:no, we. So I actually had a situation that was similar, not that long um, with a cat of ours, uh, its name was a little foot, uh, and at one point it disappeared for like a month and I I may be exaggerating that because I was a kid at the time, so it may have felt like a month, but I do know it was enough that we, you know, went flyers, we went to look at shelters to see if they had picked it up. So I know it was long enough and I think it was about a month and we had just become resigned that something had happened to him. And then one day he just shows up at the door like nothing happened, I mean perfectly healthy. He's just there, acting normal.
Speaker 1:Is it was that in California.
Speaker 2:That was in California.
Speaker 1:Because it's California.
Speaker 2:That's why. But yeah, I mean it's crazy how animals can do that. It's we forget that these are. You know they're domesticated, but they're still kind of wild. You know they're able to survive, depending on the breed, and I mean some of these toy breeds and whatnot especially cats.
Speaker 1:Cats like if, if you leave them too much, they might eat you.
Speaker 2:So will dogs. But yeah, I mean, it's wild that they can do that. It's just crazy what these animals can do.
Speaker 1:Don't try to domesticate a bear. I won't Learn that one. That one they found the guy's remains consumed by the bear.
Speaker 2:I think the most exotic I will go is a reptile. I'm not going to the big old bears. I do kind of want a pig, though I'd love to have a pig as a pet.
Speaker 1:I would do like a raccoon. They're like a cat.
Speaker 2:Oh no, Raccoons are nasty. My uncle, they ran a little animal rescue and they had raccoons and they are nasty creatures, Nasty, mean creatures, and they have sharp claws. So yeah, People think that raccoons would make good pets. I can tell you not from firsthand, because I never met the raccoons, because they actually live up in Wisconsin, they actually live up in wisconsin um, they from secondhand knowledge?
Speaker 1:uh, it is. They are not good pets. My, uh, my wife's grandfather he lived in west virginia. He had a pet raccoon really yeah, years ago. I don't like, I don't know. I don't know what it like. It wasn't like walking him down the sidewalk with a leash. I'm sure it was West Virginia mountains, okay okay, a pet raccoon.
Speaker 1:They fed it off the back porch, all right. Well, if we carry on anymore, we're going to go way past the time. Don't forget and subscribe. Leave a comment or two. We'd like to hear from our listener If this stuff is valuable and helpful to you, Um and and if it helps you know it also helps us. It gets us in front of more viewers. Watch our content. It'll be great. I'm excited about that. But thank you for listening, thank you for watching. Life's too short, so keep laughing and learning and remember idiots have way more fun, check your shoes.