determining truth at the spacefellowship

We would need a vote if option one is true. In other cases just pick the one that reflects your opinion.

This poll is for entertainment value only. Any attempts to make a serious case for your favorite option will be patently false.

Youtube or it didn't happen

I want to see evidence of ones working system.

That is the standard of truth in rocketry.

My goodness! I completely forgot an entire class of popular online verification methods.

• Youtube videos posted so soon after the fact that they could not possibly have been doctored
• Photoshopped pictures
• Wikipedia
• Ask.com
• The comments section after blog articles

I must say.... this is an excellent, and very well thought out poll.
and awesome in evry regard.

props to you Daniel.

Thanks for the props MFL. I was beginning to sag a little bit.

I must caution everyone here, though, that unless we can organize a concerted effort to click on option #1 we are in very real danger of proving it wrong. (at least according to standard logic which, as Godel informed us, is not complete.)

Again I appeal to you, click away, lest by the end of the week we know something.

My only faith is that there is an objective reality, even if we can never be sure what it is. Just because we can never be sure what it is, that is no excuse for filling the void with security beliefs about God, Jesus, Santa, the Tooth Fairy, pixies, UFOs, all politicians mean well, Simon Cowell, Glen Beck, or any other invented or self-appointed prophet or deity.

Uh Oh.. That looks like a serious attempt to validate your position. By definition in this thread it is wholesale false. (see the first post) That is truly a shame as I don't see any particular point that I disagree with. The tattered edges of my map don't read "here there be gods." Nope, my excuses for believing in prophets and deity have more to do with my fondness for bingo nights than any discomfort of the unknown.

Ah the joys of winning $12.00 busted coffee makers before some blue hair running 15 cards.

I really like the last option.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a slight error, because (the speed of) light is NOT relative to the observer, but constant. That would also match the statement about the constant speed of truth going in and out of someones ears

If you voted for truth being relative to the observer how can you say that I wrote in error? Stop being so judgmental.

Actually you are correct but the mistake is somewhat intentional. It comes from hearing "it's all relative" from non-science types who vaguely think that their ethics gains some validity by waving in the direction of a similarly named physical reality discovered by a guy who was really smart.

If there was an objective truth, the Universe would have collapsed into non-existance under the weight of incompleteness theorem. Since this is manifestly untrue, truth or lack or thereof is completely subjective and relative to the observer. The question of what is the REAL TRUTH is about as meningless as asking if electron is a nice person - completely and utterly irrelevant. And thus all science is doomed to failure. Only the Great Cthulhu can comprehend how the Universe can exist at all despite it being, presumably, of finate complexity.

Bow down before Great Cthulhu who is Dead, yet Dreaming! When He Awakes, All Shall Be Enlightened! He Will Deliver Divine OBLIVION TO US ALL!!!! MuaHA-Ha-ha!!!

I don't think that we can ever definitively determine truth, but I do think we can iteratively approach it by proving false alternative hypotheses. In other words, I like the scientific method. I'm not sure that I'd describe that as reasoned experience, but that one seemed closest...

What about the ultimate source of truths - the slashdot itself?
I refuse to vote to other falsehood-ridden answers!

Regards,
Your /.'s Average Anonymous Coward

Sorry, but Anonymous Coward doesn't count!