Gullibility Test

This topic contains 31 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  mikeboll64 1 month, 2 weeks ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #833577
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,121

    This thread is designed to test the gullibility of HN members.  It is an easy test, with only one YES or NO question.

    Do you believe that the man in the wheelchair is actually communicating via a machine with the man doing the interview?  YES or NO?

    #833580
     Lightenup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 63
    • Total replies 10,307

    I don’t do gullibility tests, ha.

    #833596
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,121

    Fair enough, Kathi.  But surely you have an opinion on the matter, right?  Do you believe Stephen Hawking was having impromptu discussions with the hundreds of people who interviewed him through the years?  Before you answer (if in fact you do), the following is in Hawking’s own words…

    So, do you think anybody could watch an automatic scrolling program passing by thousands of letters and words, twitch his cheek when the cursor happens over the letter/word he wants, and then repeat the process letter by letter and word by word until one complete sentence is ready to send to the voice box?  Could a person complete this process so rapidly that he can have a back and forth conversation with another person in real time, using multiple sentences in his immediate responses to their questions?

     

     

    #833608
     Lightenup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 63
    • Total replies 10,307

    Hawking probably got the questions ahead of time and wrote up his responses then during the taping he just selected his prewritten response to the particular questions asked.

    #833611
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,121

    I can go along with that.  Especially when these screenshots of different times during that video show what appears to be a script on Hawking’s computer – as opposed to a cursor continuously scrolling over letters and words like he described in his article…

    This one even has a paragraph highlighted…

    Perhaps those are the words the machine was going to read next?

    We’ll never know if the answers actually came from Hawking at all, but it seems we agree that he wasn’t answering spontaneously.  And if that’s the case, all of his interviews are staged theater events, and not actual interviews, right?  And that makes all the reporters and media outlets that aired Hawking interviews liars, right? And it also makes Hawking a liar for writing the article about how he communicates spontaneously.  Oh, and this last screenshot from the video shows how far they go to give the impression that the conversation is happening in real time – when we now know that’s a bald face lie…

    See how they’re playing us as fools who believe the guy in the wheelchair is communicating spontaneously?

    So Kathi, had you ever even considered this before?  No?  Me either.  That’s because we’ve all been indoctrinated into believing anything “scientists” tell us – without ever actually questioning it to see if it even makes a lick of sense.  I dropped this one on my son last night, and mind blown.  He couldn’t believe that he’d never even considered it before.  That is what the truth movement has done for me and millions of others like me.  Start questioning the crap they tell you in the mainstream media, and you too will come to the conclusion that 50% of it is completely absurd BS, and backs a common agenda.  It’s propaganda – not news.  Start looking into the things NASA claims, and the BS/propaganda meter levels out at about the 99% mark.

    Anyway, thanks for playing.  🙂

     

     

    #833637
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 895
    • Total replies 18,419

    According to this video, he actually inputted around 15-20% of the text and the rest was inferred using a body of data containing his own writings. So it would be like saying, “The fool has” and you would get the whole thing, “The fool has said in his own heart there is no God”. I imagine there was a key for deleting the inferred text if it was wrong.

    #833665
     Lightenup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 63
    • Total replies 10,307

    Mike,

    you said:

    See how they’re playing us as fools who believe the guy in the wheelchair is communicating spontaneously?

    I think anyone who believes that videos or tv specials or movies aren’t prepared in advance to fit in a time slot by the use of editing or scripting and/or rehearsing and/or having several “takes” is gullible and would benefit from being an extra in a movie or taking a field trip to a news station. I really don’t see what the fuss is about. I would assume they gave the guy his questions beforehand to prepare the answers for.

    #833666
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 895
    • Total replies 18,419

    I agree LU. There is nothing to see here.

    #833678
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,121

    Kathi:  I think anyone who believes that…tv specials…aren’t prepared in advance…by the use of…scripting and/or rehearsing…is gullible…

    I really don’t see what the fuss is about. I would assume they gave the guy his questions beforehand to prepare the answers for.

    T8:  I agree LU. There is nothing to see here.

    So let me get this straight…  You guys think it’s normal and commonplace for television interviews to be “scripted” and “rehearsed” in advance – like they are a Hollywood movie?  So when I’m watching a 60 Minutes correspondent throwing some hard ball questions at an unsuspecting cad who has no idea what he’s in for, I should have known that the questions and answers had been scripted and rehearsed ahead of time, and that what I’m seeing isn’t really the news interview I’ve been led to believe it is, but rather just two actors playing their parts in a theatrical production?  If that’s what you’re saying, then you are correct that I was incredibly gullible – because I believed news interviews were actually spontaneous interviews.

    Anyway, back to Stephen Hawking…  Are you saying that during Hawking interviews, he was basically just a prop?   He had been sent the questions, and prepared his written answers months ahead of time, and the actual interview was just a matter of him sitting there doing nothing while the reporter read his lines, and the computerized voice box read Hawking’s pre-written lines after each question?

    If not, please clarify.

     

    #833682
     Ed J 
    Participant
    • Topics started 155
    • Total replies 27,972

    Do you believe that the man in the wheelchair is actually communicating via a machine with the man doing the interview? YES or NO?

    I don’t know – I always had doubts to whether that was really him communicating or not.

    I was ALWAYS willing to answer “Yes” or “No” or “I Don’t Know” to simple one part questions.

    The problem was: you did not ask me simple one part questions,
    you instead asked two part questions. One part you would have right,
    the other part you would use as a springboard to attach your dogmas to.

    So I dare not say yes, as it may appear that I’m affirming your dogmas as true.
    Since I did know, “I Don’t Know” was off the table, leaving as the only choice “No”.
    I would then answer “No”, and you would act like I was disagreeing to the truth in it.

    So the difficulty was in you purposely asking two part questions, which mean to entrap.

    Do I make myself clear? “Yes” or “No” <– please answer

    God bless
    Ed J

    #833700
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,121

    Ed: I don’t know – I always had doubts to whether that was really him communicating or not.

    I never really gave it any thought.  They told me he could carry on spontaneous communication through his high tech Intel machine, and I just blindly believed he could.  I’m not that gullible anymore.

    You say you’ve always had doubts… but what do you say now that you’ve given it some thought?  In your opinion, is it even remotely possible for anyone to carry on a lengthy impromptu conversation by twitching their cheek as a cursor randomly scrolls over letters and commonly used words?

    And if not, have we been purposely tricked/lied to?  Or do you agree with Kathi that we should have all known it was just a theatrical production with a machine reading lines that were written and rehearsed ahead of time?

    Because I’m pretty sure the writers, producers and actors who created this interview were counting on the general public believing that Hawking spontaneously cheek-typed the above as a response to an impromptu question asked by the interviewer.  I’m certain they wouldn’t have added this little tidbit to the production if they thought the vast majority of the viewing public already knew that Hawking wasn’t talking in real time with the interviewer.  What say you?

     

    #833764
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 895
    • Total replies 18,419

    They told me he could carry on spontaneous communication through his high tech Intel machine, and I just blindly believed he could.

    Who told you that?

    And doesn’t he have that to some degree even if he only types out 15% of it? I type in website addresses all the time into my browser, but get prompted and do not have to complete it. I still call that spontaneous.

    #833789
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,121

    T8: Who told you that?

    Nobody explicitly told me Stephen Hawking carried on spontaneous conversations via his machine.  Just like nobody has explicitly told any of us that Space X rockets landing on floating barges is real.  Here’s how I said it to Kathi earlier in the thread…

    Mike:  …I should have known that the questions and answers had been scripted and rehearsed ahead of time, and that what I’m seeing isn’t really the news interview I’ve been led to believe it is, but rather just two actors playing their parts in a theatrical production?

    So I meant “told by implication” – not by a phone call or personal memo sent directly to me.

    T8:  And doesn’t he have that to some degree even if he only types out 15% of it?

    So then let’s just deal with that 15%, okay?  Let’s assume that this point of the interview falls into the 15% that Hawking is cheek-typing spontaneously…

    Because, after all, they have told us (led us to believe by implication) as much by making it clearly appear as a spontaneous and un-rehearsed answer to a question from the interviewer, right?  I mean, what sense would that response make if we’re all supposed to know that the entire thing was pre-written and pre-rehearsed ahead of time, right?  So can we agree that we were led to believe that this answer was spontaneous, and cheek-typed on the spot by Hawking?

    (Please T8, for the love of God can you remove yourself from the “Must immediately and absolutely disagree with any point the whack-job conspiracy nut is making, no matter what” mindset for a second, and just give the God’s honest truth to that last question?)

    #833794
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 895
    • Total replies 18,419

    Nobody explicitly told me Stephen Hawking carried on spontaneous conversations via his machine.

    LOL. So you are having this conversation with yourself then. I never considered Hawking. I just believed that he was communicating using technology and he is. Never considered how it might work and obviously without even ayong anything, there would have been obvious limitations compared with the way we communicate. Discussion over right?

    #833809
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,121

    T8:  I never considered Hawking.

    That was my original point… neither did I.  I just blindly believed that the man could carry on a back and forth conversation using a cheek muscle, because that’s what we were all led to believe.

     

    T8:  I just believed that he was communicating using technology and he is.

    Well that’s what I’m trying to find out, but you keep obfuscating.  Here we go again…

    In your opinion, is it possible for Stephen Hawking to have made the captioned comment above in a spontaneous back and forth conversation with the interviewer – as we are clearly led to believe in the video?  YES or NO?

     

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 32 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2018 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account