3 ms·
You’d think skeptics would learn their lesson after rouge waves. Tons of eyewitness accounts going back to antiquity but no footage, considered a myth for ages.
by newZWhoDis 3y ago
You’d think skeptics would learn their lesson after rouge waves. Tons of eyewitness accounts going back to antiquity but no footage, considered a myth for ages.
We even had a bunch of math saying they weren’t possible/probable! (Ex once in an 100M years or so) so they were quite sure of themselves.
The we started to get large scale buoy data and sure enough, rouge waves! (the math was wrong).
Our understanding of earth phenomenon is far from complete. For lightning, red spites/green ghosts/etc are all relatively new discoveries.
- wruza 3y agoCould the same be said about ball lightnings? Many common things became suspiciously rare after invention of pocket cameras. I’m not questioning gp’s credibility, because I also found myself in impossible situations like kitchen pot overheating and exploding dramatically, which supposedly should only happen in controlled lab circumstances. But I understand when people can’t believe. Added: we also should look for easier explanations, especially when it comes to early memories. Kid’s imagination is a powerful thing.
- bnralt 3y agoRogue waves are actually a good example. They occur in places where there’s usually no recording equipment, and almost no one claims to have seen one. Yet numerous ones have been identified. Ball lightning supposedly occurs in places where there’s recording equipment everywhere, and people all over the place claim to have seen it. Yet we don’t have any evidence for it yet.