Law of Attraction as Viewed Thru the Law of One

[Monica]

The kind folks from the flat earth society would argue with you that the earth is indeed round... But like a pancake. So basically that too is a controversy and therefore debatable.

True. But the evidence for a round Earth (pictures from space, other celestial bodies are round, etc.) is so overwhelming that it's difficult to take their argument seriously.

Look at what I just said. That was subjective. I think that their claims are laughable, and it so happens I'm in the majority on the round Earth issue.

But regarding other controversies, I might be in the minority, because the mainstream does not yet accept the evidence. But that will change as the evidence gains exposure.

There is an obvious example that I'd rather not mention, as it would surely get this thread sidetracked. Suffice to say that sometimes there is forensic evidence that is irrefutable once observed, but the challenge is getting people to actually look at it! Even the most irrefutable evidence is worthless if no one see it.

Hence, something might be obvious to you or me, but not obvious at all to someone who has not looked at the evidence. Or, they might not understand the evidence. Or, the evidence might be tainted ("figures don't lie but liars can figure"). An excellent example is the issue of vaccinations. The drug companies routinely show graphs showing a sharp decline in the disease when the vaccine is introduced. This appears to be irrefutable evidence. However, I have seen the original graphs and the decline was already occurring before the vaccine was introduced. They just chose to highlight a small segment of the graph!...giving the illusion of what they wanted it to convey. Trickery.

If all evidence were obvious and irrefutable, then we wouldn't have hung juries or juries letting murderers go free because they didn't understand what the DNA tests meant. With evidence must be interpretation and understanding of that evidence.

The problem is that some people think they already understand the evidence, but they really don't. Who is to say? I can think of many controversies (the most obvious one is that-which-must-not-be-named, haha) in which there appear to be reputable experts on both sides of the debate. So, the bottom line is that, except for very simple issues like gravity (since it can be demonstrated anytime, anywhere), pretty much all controversies are debatable. That's why they're controversies! You might think the subject is settled, and maybe it is, to your satisfaction, but I might disagree. And, if I showed you enough new info, you just might change your mind! (If your mind were open enough to be willing to look at the new info, that is. NOT referring to you personally, Ali - just speaking in generalities here.)

I mean to say that what one person considers tangibly proven another person considers hoax. We need a more objective standard of measuring the difference.

Exactly. But I don't think we will ever have a 'more objective standard of measuring the difference' at least not in 3D, because, remember, 3D is designed to accommodate everyone's free will. That's why our cosmic friends can't land en masse on the white house lawn. It would violate the free will of those who choose not to believe in aliens. Look at crop circles. Stunning proof of some anomalies energies. And yet, there are still those (actually the majority) who still choose to bury their heads in the sand. It won't matter what sort of standards we come up with. There will still be those who won't accept it. Just like the flat Earth people. And they have that right.

To me every argument is an argument. Either factual evidence or solid reasoning supports it or denies it. What people do with this is their choice. But I give it in spite of what they want to hear.

Ah, but what you're not considering (if I may respectfully offer this) is that not everyone agrees with what constitutes 'factual evidence/solid reasoning!'