• Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
    18·
    12 hours ago

    I wanted to see if this was really a quote by Mark Twain and found this article on snopes which states that there is no evidence linking this quote to Twain. Instead there is a quote from one of his books with a similar sentiment so its possible it was someone paraphrasing Twain

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-mark-twain-say-its-easier-to-fool-people-than-to-convince-them-that-they-have-been-fooled/

    So, ironically, the quote is meta AF.

  • The_Caretaker@lemm.eeEnglish
    20·
    17 hours ago

    “To fool a person is easy; you just need to overcome their intelligence. To convince a person they have been fooled is difficult; you have to overcome their pride.” I forget where I read that.

    • Klear@lemmy.worldEnglish
      7·
      11 hours ago

      “If you want to be remembered forever, come up with a clever quote”

      - Anonymous

  • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
    831·
    23 hours ago

    A coworker of mine started falling down the YouTube conspiracy rabbit hole. He said something about the moon landing maybe being a hoax. I told him that when I was in college I used the big telescope to look at the moon landing site, so I knew for sure it was real. After that, he believed in the moon landing.

    Now of course I was lying about seeing the moon landing site. Terrestrial telescopes can’t see the landing site. I convinced my friend to believe the truth by countering a lie from a stranger with a lie from someone he trusts.

    • Sneezycat@sopuli.xyz
      29·
      22 hours ago

      I upvoted this, and then I was like “wait a sec… are they fooling us?” and had to look up if you can’t see the moon landing site from Earth.

      Of course you can see the site, but indeed no telescope has enough resolving power to see any items left there. So I guess you didn’t fool us this time.

    • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.worldEnglish
      211·
      22 hours ago

      Pedantry alert, neerrrr:

      You can see the moon landing sites easily enough if you know where to look, and can match up the geography easily. What you can’t do from the ground is what a lot of folks expect, which is see any of the left behind equipment, rover tracks, boot prints, flags, etc. for a couple of reasons. First, the features are too small to be physically possible for a purely optical telescope to actually resolve. And even then, the random motion of the Earth’s atmosphere would distort your image too much to make out anything that small at that distance.

      • zergtoshi@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        11 hours ago

        It’s less the motion of the atmosphere that causes the distortion, but rather differences in its temperature and hence the density of the air, which causes differences in the refraction index of the air along the way of the light.
        The variable refraction index makes it look like the atmosphere is moving though.
        But that’s the effect of the light not going in a straight line and not the cause of it.

      • YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        19 hours ago

        random motion of the Earth’s atmosphere

        Are you able to elaborate on what you mean by this at all please, or possibly suggest a direction to look in to find more about what this means and the implications?

        • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
          9·
          18 hours ago

          Have you ever looked at something on the horizon and it’s all shimmery and wavy and won’t hold still? That’s because air (and moisture in the air) diffracts light. And the air is not still, either. When you’re looking an incredibly small object that’s extremely far away the effect is rather like trying to see through one of those pebble textured glass shower doors, except if it were moving and the object you were looking at were the size of a gnat. And also several miles past the door.

          • felsiq@lemmy.zip
            4·
            18 hours ago

            Just to add to this, air at different temperatures and moisture levels bends light to different degrees, which is why the layers and pockets of air that form our atmosphere make stars shimmer. It’s partially why astronomers are so eager to get telescopes into space (like Hubble and the James Webb), since the lack of this effect lets them resolve much smaller light sources than you could hope to beneath the atmosphere.

          • YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            14 hours ago

            That’s basically how I’ve always pictured it, like in my mental physics playground or whatever, the many, many particles may not be dense when you take a small sample (like a cubic foot of air or something) but through miles of atmosphere it adds up and the light has lots to bounce around and off of before it gets to you. Do I basically have that right? That comment someone added makes me think im understanding it right but maybe not explaining my understanding quite right, but maybe you get what I’m trying to say.

            • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              7 hours ago

              Yes, and also different patches of air are different densities because of temperature, or humidity, and they’re neither even nor consistent nor still. Convection makes the atmosphere bubble, wind makes it shear, and all the rest of it. The air itself acts as a lens, and a very inconsistent and unpredictable one at that.

            • oo1@lemmings.worldEnglish
              1·
              13 hours ago

              Similar just the impact of dust over a large enough distance.

              Try going up to the top of, say, a 50 storey building in a moderately polluted city during a fairly still, warm, dry spell of weather and look down at the ground.

              It’ll likely look a lot more dusty than from street level.

    • YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      19 hours ago

      Have you been telling this story a while? Or are you intentionally taking credit for something you didn’t do for meme cred?

      Edit: actually double xp meme credit, including the OP meme cred of lying for the meme and also the meme-ness of telling the story as OC

    • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
      3·
      21 hours ago

      That’s exactly the sort of thing I was thinking about. White lies to steer people away from fear and hate … benevolent demagoguery?

      • SereneSadie
        6·
        20 hours ago

        In ATLA, there’s an infamous episode called The Great Divide.

        Aang tells a lie to get two tribes to stop fighting a pointless feud that’s been going on a hundred years or so. And the fandom seems to get all huffy about that.

        I think he did the right thing. If there’s nothing to prove he’s lying about how the feud began, then there’s nothing to prove about why it should continue either.

  • niktemadur@lemmy.world
    54·
    23 hours ago

    Plot twist: there is no direct evidence that Twain ever said such a quote. Which is very fitting for this meme, its’ very point itself.

    • arotrios@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      2·
      18 hours ago

      Or, as has been my experience:

      “Every time an engineer designs something that’s foolproof, it’s destined to prove him a fool in the end.”

      • oo1@lemmings.worldEnglish
        2·
        13 hours ago

        Urgh, when you forgot to check the fool-performance charateristic curve on the datasheet and it was on a log scale.

  • ceenote@lemmy.world
    29·
    5 hours ago

    “All the conman did was take his money. You made him feel stupid.”

    Don’t remember who that quote was from, and that’s certainly not the exact quote, but I always liked it. If it rings a bell for anyone, I’d like to know.

    Edit: CW: Reddit. It was David Frum, apparently. In spite of that I still like the quote.