Eddie Bravo Flat Earther?
It is common knowledge to anyone in the BJJ world to know that Eddie Bravo is 100% pro flat earth. But what is the reason of Eddie’s support? Because Eddie has told everyone that initially he was opposed to all the flat earth talk:
Compare that with one of the more recent videos of Eddie when asked about flat earth on the JRE podcast:
The reason why Eddie supports flat earth is very ambiguous, but we do get a glimpse of how Eddie’s sees the subject from this brief exchange with Rogan:
Rogan: “Why not indulge the full realm of possibilities and not cling to the conspiracy every single time?”
Bravo: “No. No. NASA can get pictures—they’ve been doing CGI composites this whole time…”
Rogan: “Please answer my question. Forget about stating what NASA does. Please answer my question. Why do you always go toward the conspiracy? Why do you never consider the possibility…”
Bravo: “Too many lies. Too many lies.”
Rogan: “But Eddie they’re not the same people.”
Bravo: “It’s all the same.”
Rogan: “So everybody’s lying?”
Bravo: “Yes. It’s a global thing. They’re all in on it.”
Eddie Bravo Other Conspiracies: Beyond Flat Earth
Eddie is one of the very first people that makes me learn about other conspiracies, specifically Tower 7 and 9/11. Overall Eddie is the type of person that questions everything so it is not strange to see him dig deep in topics that are deemed “controversial”
What is Flat EARTH?
A flat earth would require a completely new science (including a completely new science of history, philosophy, etc). But conversely, if the earth were really a disc, then all scientists in the world would either be liars or simply completely stupid. And that not only applies to the scientists of the present, but also in the past. Even in ancient times, it was known that the earth is a sphere and the entire development of modern science is based on this, among other things. Since there are people in the world who can be called “scientists”, they would have to deprive the rest of the population of the “truth” about the flat earth.
And that’s what I least understand about all this nonsense about the flat earth: why would you do that? Let’s assume for a moment that people who believe in a flat earth are right. The earth is really a disc and all scientists of all time (including various politicians, rulers, educated people, smart autodidacts, etc) conceal this fact. Why on earth do you do that? It would be the truly greatest conspiracy of all time. All scientific knowledge, virtually from the beginning of rational human history, would be forged. Anyone who has been interested in research in the last millennia, works at a university, at a school, and so on: billions of people, therefore, should be part of the conspiracy. It would be enormously difficult to maintain this deception. The complete scientific output of humankind would be a complex, costly, and laboriously fabricated lie. What for?
Seriously, who benefits from showing people that the earth is a bullet? At least I can understand how to motivate other conspiracy theories. It is misleading to land on the moon, because one wants to humiliate the Soviets, but technically is not capable of a moon flight. One invents a climate change to raise research funds. Chemtrails are sprayed to manipulate the climate or raise awareness among the population. It conceals the existence of Planet X to prevent a mass panic. And so on. This is all complete nonsense but at least somehow traceable. But who would have something to convince people that the earth is round? Why would the existence of a shallow earth have to be kept secret?
If the earth were flat, the cover-up of this fact would be one of the most complicated and laborious tasks in human history. And despite much thought, I can not think of a single, even plausible reason why you should do that.
If you listen to what the flat earth followers tell you, you rarely find a “master plan” like other conspiracy theories. But only a general discomfort to the “experts” who tell something about the world. Discomfort against being “persuaded” anything; something that contradicts what one himself believes to know about the world. And if you then, for whatever reason, know very little about the world, then there is a tremendous amount where you just have to believe the “expert”. With the discomfort against “the experts” one has chosen in the UK from the EU. With this discomfort, Donald Trump became President of the United States. This discomfort is widespread. That’s probably not going to change that fast either; I suspect that to some extent this discomfort is inevitably in all of us.
And above all, you can not get away from it, if you feel the people feel this discomfort, with even more expertise counteracts. Anyone who thinks he would be lying to everyone anyway will not suddenly change his worldview just by waving some scientific paper or calculating how the gravitational force would act on a disc shaped earth. It will only be confirmed more in that science wants to persuade something. The only thing that I think you can do is abolish “the experts”. And that does not mean, of course, that all scientists should pack up and go home. But that it is important to counteract the image that scientists still have in public. The cliché image of the bespectacled man (women do not appear in the cliché) in the lab coat, which makes unintelligible stuff of itself, performs equally incomprehensible but potentially dangerous experiments and nothing to do with the lives of “normal” people. You have to make it clear to people that “scientist” is just a normal job done by ordinary people. And that one can also deal with science if you yourself are not a scientist. That one can understand and understand the findings of science itself. Maybe not always complete, but yet so far as to be able to think about the world reasonably.
If one understands what “the experts” say and understands that “the experts” are only ordinary people, then it is no longer “the experts”. And then the discomfort that you bring to someone you do not understand disappears. In short, it needs more public relations. More knowledge transfer. And it has to be reasonable; at eye level (not the declarations by press release, which still produce too many PR bodies of research institutions). That is not easy. But much simpler than telling the world, the earth would be a slice …